Optimize checking for interrupts by replacing any? with NOT empty?

Doing an object allocation profile on Shopify in production using stackprof reveals that the number three generator of objects is Liquid#context has_interrupt?

The method is called in the main flow of the block rendering, which means it is called a lot. The documentation for .any? (http://ruby-doc.org/core-2.1.2/Enumerable.html#method-i-any-3F) states that:

```
Passes each element of the collection to the given block. 
The method returns true if the block ever returns a value other than false or nil. 
If the block is not given, Ruby adds an implicit block of { |obj| obj } that will cause 
any? to return true if at least one of the collection members is not false or nil.
```

Note the 'implicit block' bit -- that's where the allocation comes from. 

Changed this to !empty, which is equivalent if (and only if) the array in question cannot contain nil/false values. The `@interrupts` member is only altered by push_interrupt, which is only ever called with a the keywords break or continue, so this is perfectly safe. 

The existing tests appear to cover both the break and continue tags, so I did not add any as this should not alter behaviour in any way.

I temporarily altered the the code in profile.rb to benchmark object allocation.

Here's before:
```
vagrant@vagrant:~/src/liquid/performance$ bundle exec ruby profile.rb               
==================================                                                  
  Mode: object(1)                                                                   
  Samples: 9639300 (0.00% miss rate)                                                
  GC: 0 (0.00%)                                                                     
==================================                                                  
     TOTAL    (pct)     SAMPLES    (pct)     FRAME                                  
   1947200  (20.2%)     1462300  (15.2%)     Liquid::Context#variable               
   2185900  (22.7%)     1433400  (14.9%)     Liquid::Variable#lax_parse             
    833800   (8.7%)      833800   (8.7%)     Liquid::Context#has_interrupt?         
  10194700 (105.8%)      806100   (8.4%)     Liquid::Block#parse                    
    752500   (7.8%)      752500   (7.8%)     block in Liquid::Variable#lax_parse    
   2944500  (30.5%)      521600   (5.4%)     Liquid::Block#create_variable          
    438600   (4.6%)      438600   (4.6%)     Liquid::Template#tokenize              
    480300   (5.0%)      433300   (4.5%)     Liquid::Context#find_variable          
   2368300  (24.6%)      421100   (4.4%)     Liquid::Context#resolve                
   3075100  (31.9%)      300600   (3.1%)     Liquid::Variable#render                
   1075400  (11.2%)      295500   (3.1%)     block in Liquid::Variable#render       
    289100   (3.0%)      289100   (3.0%)     Liquid::If#lax_parse                   
   2422900  (25.1%)      238800   (2.5%)     block in Liquid::Block#create_variable 
    204800   (2.1%)      204800   (2.1%)     Liquid::StandardFilters#truncatewords  
    146100   (1.5%)      143500   (1.5%)     Liquid::For#lax_parse                  
  10927100 (113.4%)      108700   (1.1%)     Liquid::Block#render_all               
    600600   (6.2%)       98500   (1.0%)     Liquid::Context#invoke                 
     70700   (0.7%)       70700   (0.7%)     Liquid::Block#block_delimiter          
     48300   (0.5%)       48000   (0.5%)     Liquid::Context#initialize             
  10764400 (111.7%)       47600   (0.5%)     Liquid::Tag.parse                      
```

Here's with the change in this PR:
```
vagrant@vagrant:~/src/liquid/performance$ bundle exec ruby profile.rb               
==================================                                                  
  Mode: object(1)                                                                   
  Samples: 8805500 (0.00% miss rate)                                                
  GC: 0 (0.00%)                                                                     
==================================                                                  
     TOTAL    (pct)     SAMPLES    (pct)     FRAME                                  
   1947200  (22.1%)     1462300  (16.6%)     Liquid::Context#variable               
   2185900  (24.8%)     1433400  (16.3%)     Liquid::Variable#lax_parse             
  10194700 (115.8%)      806100   (9.2%)     Liquid::Block#parse                    
    752500   (8.5%)      752500   (8.5%)     block in Liquid::Variable#lax_parse    
   2944500  (33.4%)      521600   (5.9%)     Liquid::Block#create_variable          
    438600   (5.0%)      438600   (5.0%)     Liquid::Template#tokenize              
    480300   (5.5%)      433300   (4.9%)     Liquid::Context#find_variable          
   2368300  (26.9%)      421100   (4.8%)     Liquid::Context#resolve                
   3075100  (34.9%)      300600   (3.4%)     Liquid::Variable#render                
   1075400  (12.2%)      295500   (3.4%)     block in Liquid::Variable#render       
    289100   (3.3%)      289100   (3.3%)     Liquid::If#lax_parse                   
   2422900  (27.5%)      238800   (2.7%)     block in Liquid::Block#create_variable 
    204800   (2.3%)      204800   (2.3%)     Liquid::StandardFilters#truncatewords  
    146100   (1.7%)      143500   (1.6%)     Liquid::For#lax_parse                  
   9043900 (102.7%)      108700   (1.2%)     Liquid::Block#render_all               
    600600   (6.8%)       98500   (1.1%)     Liquid::Context#invoke                 
     70700   (0.8%)       70700   (0.8%)     Liquid::Block#block_delimiter          
     48300   (0.5%)       48000   (0.5%)     Liquid::Context#initialize             
  10764400 (122.2%)       47600   (0.5%)     Liquid::Tag.parse                      
     47000   (0.5%)       47000   (0.5%)     block in Liquid::Context#find_variable 
```

833,800 (8.7%) less objects allocated :-)

@camilo, @boourns, @dylanahsmith: Code review, please.
CC: @csfrancis 
channeling your wisdom here @dylanahsmith