Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:101083 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 31635 invoked from network); 7 Nov 2017 12:03:05 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 7 Nov 2017 12:03:05 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=lists@rhsoft.net; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=lists@rhsoft.net; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain rhsoft.net designates 91.118.73.15 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: lists@rhsoft.net X-Host-Fingerprint: 91.118.73.15 mail.thelounge.net Received: from [91.118.73.15] ([91.118.73.15:38291] helo=mail.thelounge.net) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id EA/A1-09857-5F0A10A5 for ; Tue, 07 Nov 2017 07:03:04 -0500 Received: from rh.thelounge.net (Authenticated sender: h.reindl@thelounge.net) by mail.thelounge.net (THELOUNGE MTA) with ESMTPSA id 3yWSjw2gwgzXMT for ; Tue, 7 Nov 2017 13:03:00 +0100 (CET) To: internals@lists.php.net References: <64.21.07742.EF158F95@pb1.pair.com> <71.50.09857.3BBEAF95@pb1.pair.com> <6643d10b-8703-693c-15c2-da338022ef41@rhsoft.net> <18.19.09857.3E54CF95@pb1.pair.com> <941fd347-4a17-78b6-1bd7-4a5519aa722b@rhsoft.net> <67.8E.09857.7D58DF95@pb1.pair.com> <6A.75.09857.9F6EEF95@pb1.pair.com> <55fb932f-7f61-33eb-1fd9-aa425bc6ff27@rhsoft.net> <748869f7-13bb-5bdd-6fec-399a33b790b3@rhsoft.net> <572d0e30-7214-0842-6624-7647514b9ad1@librelamp.com> Message-ID: <0f4b93e2-d8fa-edbd-e1ff-5021018393f0@rhsoft.net> Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2017 13:03:00 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: de-CH Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: RFC - Array Of for PHP 7 From: lists@rhsoft.net ("lists@rhsoft.net") Am 07.11.2017 um 12:53 schrieb Tony Marston: > It should also be obvious to every first year student that if a program > contains code that is rarely or never used then carrying around the > "weight" of that code has a detrimental effect but you don#t get the basics right: you need to measure if that effect is significant at all > The code has a bigger > footprint, therefore takes up more memory and is slower to load slower to load don't matter, if the memory overhead is significant needs to be measured > It also > increases the burden on those who maintain that code as they have to > consider every piece of code without knowing how often it is used. and *that* is not *your* problem - the whole discussion was about your claim that it has a bad effect for everybody out there GOD DAMNED: stop to ignore "it can even happen that due the implementation other code paths which would not have been touched otherwise may get optimized due refactoring and the end result can be even faster in general" - that you ignored it multiple times proves that you can't say anything which would not prove your claims about the overall impact wrong well, you always ignore anything but your opinion and the next step is calling people "except if you are a nit-picking, anal retentive OCD sufferer" because they don't follow your argumentation as it happened in several threads