Jonathan M Davis: > the compiler can likely make > assumptions about null that it can't make about [], since it probably treats > [] more generally without worrying about the fact that it happens to be empty > as far as optimizations go - that and there _is_ a semantic difference > between > null and [] if you're messing with the ptr property, so Walter may think that > it's best for null to not be turned into the same thing as [] automatically.
Thank you for your answer. I have added a low-priority enhancement request. Bye, bearophile
