Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:104095 Return-Path: Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 57071 invoked from network); 4 Feb 2019 10:29:44 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO NAM01-SN1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com) (40.107.82.92) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 4 Feb 2019 10:29:44 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=RWSoftware.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-zend-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=rsiSdo7+Z+VEBVTlgZXliSlOoBp8sG5UiM9JNfsTFsI=; b=OnM0s2GOEiv9nbIPbXADiFLyiPwYoBdCDd1ZmOF93Pga0kMVqiwcx5v/TWtXzFd9kX74nyXPoZ8y98AnpeKx+AI7jVSzUrvMD7AD86rIUEF7w9oLeFc8ATLN4HwpKThtL2agHPjS/jmtWAFjQ0z98+l9M8Q6YM6iXebM0pCM6qo= Received: from DM6PR02MB5932.namprd02.prod.outlook.com (20.179.68.220) by DM6PR02MB4314.namprd02.prod.outlook.com (20.176.104.143) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.1580.17; Mon, 4 Feb 2019 07:10:33 +0000 Received: from DM6PR02MB5932.namprd02.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::bd59:7d60:3d3d:d5c7]) by DM6PR02MB5932.namprd02.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::bd59:7d60:3d3d:d5c7%3]) with mapi id 15.20.1580.019; Mon, 4 Feb 2019 07:10:33 +0000 To: Larry Garfield , "internals@lists.php.net" Thread-Topic: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] JIT Thread-Index: AQHUuUlqVOVjmKFgoEm1MWGJHDXwwaXJidMAgAAKfwCAAAJ7AIAABI+AgAAYQQCAAGQxAIAAu6AAgABQ64CABBp7AA== Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2019 07:10:32 +0000 Message-ID: References: <2321148.uWQDsfDpJu@vulcan> <4df2d7cf-31dc-a9cf-eefe-d92bad199312@zend.com> <5896422.hBkj740jAu@vulcan> In-Reply-To: <5896422.hBkj740jAu@vulcan> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-clientproxiedby: HE1PR1001CA0021.EURPRD10.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (2603:10a6:3:f7::31) To DM6PR02MB5932.namprd02.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:5:153::28) authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=dmitry@zend.com; x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-originating-ip: [212.232.72.197] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1;DM6PR02MB4314;6:hTva2JJNU/GFOS3gVpqAqLjoJmM7Rr7QdCE131nfpwhRvPR+M2fdlp0geKqI/OMpqD7x8ITOZaDWxAm2abkBo2+O913WF6TPOwypAryfjCl0P9dvmseekHyljDiJM39mlP3JO0oYhBQmYzwBGK8ogB7sCltX7dXMSa6gJ0oU6Ko4BJiur3RCSsQ6+paGYKM49l+WAXKOh0nHEGwejOD8Gs/gDontpfQrOjnMtOOVjyZy7GDha2yZg6ioTUC1G92rzdtjIdSSYlwbcElCEdrS75OMsZh8FoWXCBAB1wMrALorgKWdcHwW4/4G/wtKzDBvG4DeElcUxE2f1lGHaH5yORvFMrR5zMOQ3Nlij0+xZwV3kGCWPmRMd4xGHCv7+z5GbNiG2MlWCvndt0onTOd9K9T0d/kzLXsadl9k74o4bQPdwjnWvejMBKteieGyvldKZu14RM3v6F3NFM4Xm4FVIQ==;5:dRDhM52snw1yngOkG9aSupqxxnJ8aR5nhkj2OL3SWnPiT55zd3OO0O0l8ihG0ao5gdMFseFkADaR7jHLYCgf626mNb3R0HaaKiqvUnCC3L6YSQdXz/nw6+U8tJ24Qo5T1+C9wQcYZXvJts3Pqm0/rbrhLRV1hcySC8ACjaTb8t1X2lCt8sS4G0aXz+mMGsaQ2TIoQGpEPvotZnmxOPzm8w==;7:9O3MA5BfNb+fXQ/O62zzDnKNb85b5yMdgNM1Tv1XuNM29+xSq5QO2xDZRMWwMB8pENF1+SlAfPHcai7a4RQ5C2458IPeGACipuqhrkj2F6FXYNKbNtJEEr2TmMn+E3EVR+b48kR8kuQZe5Vnv8u8xw== x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: e3e1370e-54e1-45c2-2153-08d68a6fda3c x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:(2390118)(7020095)(4652040)(8989299)(4534185)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990200)(5600110)(711020)(4605077)(2017052603328)(7153060)(7193020);SRVR:DM6PR02MB4314; x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: DM6PR02MB4314: x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-forefront-prvs: 0938781D02 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM;SFS:(10019020)(136003)(39840400004)(366004)(346002)(376002)(396003)(199004)(189003)(66066001)(52116002)(99286004)(76176011)(6506007)(53546011)(102836004)(386003)(316002)(256004)(6116002)(3846002)(110136005)(97736004)(106356001)(6246003)(25786009)(14454004)(6436002)(93886005)(31686004)(105586002)(6486002)(6512007)(2501003)(53936002)(71200400001)(71190400001)(478600001)(68736007)(229853002)(11346002)(36756003)(8936002)(186003)(86362001)(2616005)(81166006)(8676002)(476003)(81156014)(2906002)(31696002)(446003)(305945005)(486006)(26005)(7736002);DIR:OUT;SFP:1102;SCL:1;SRVR:DM6PR02MB4314;H:DM6PR02MB5932.namprd02.prod.outlook.com;FPR:;SPF:None;LANG:en;PTR:InfoNoRecords;A:1;MX:1; received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: zend.com does not designate permitted sender hosts) x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: +jn3olzLtXzvXQrYrh3rsrF7XSXBD/Bkz+48dV/Q2GOgJxcLRDt+5iWFHNSBklgejxjqbyXqJQr4k+SzVKwwxLC0V5HMc2GbRAj+G+md4LnQ06uKnGXCwrxguLiX3bmkfRK68Hms6+oLyv5pqB8EhDTz3zqV2YrAovd8f7Drl02JCTWUZUV0t1sYTG/2SfNOqM6igJxJNwO+oCBPycCu10Idz0M8cSkfrRxS41yIVoooMUr1nwPjoDgRGbEnS6jbnfx1ONhFQtD/UBj5KLFOwppdBDy0IkkRRAWmsgxN5D6f0bQWIuk8MxLwwOaXMUMlgbA4lbk/T/gKYd5UqV3LKgdAIoLA0hE+DoIc2Z5xGx8A0PQzJ9J0koSKG4jHERdUlfANj9QPsh2RNaH3/Io13f+uNAJjLkRL184tiH38R6c= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-ID: <6B338F3485145A45A532FA2BE889DF0B@namprd02.prod.outlook.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: zend.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: e3e1370e-54e1-45c2-2153-08d68a6fda3c X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 04 Feb 2019 07:10:32.0376 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 32210298-c08b-4829-8097-6b12c025a892 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM6PR02MB4314 Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] JIT From: dmitry@zend.com (Dmitry Stogov) On 2/1/19 7:30 PM, Larry Garfield wrote: > On Friday, February 1, 2019 2:41:06 AM CST Dmitry Stogov wrote: >> On 2/1/19 3:29 AM, Larry Garfield wrote: >=20 >>> Question from a non-compiler-engineer: Could we end up in a situation >>> where >>> future language features (in 8.3 or something) are only performant on J= IT- >>> enabled platforms? I know there were some RFCs rejected in the past on >>> the >>> grounds that they involved too many runtime checks (and thus a performa= nce >>> hit); if it were possible for a JIT to optimize some of those away, it >>> might make the cost acceptable. However, if a JIT only works on some >>> systems that might widen the gap between have- and have-not platforms. >> >> I think, JIT only approach doesn't make a lot of sense for PHP, with one >> of the most fast VM. And this is a trend. Even V8, starting from JIT >> only, switched back to VM+JIT. >> >> Thanks. Dmitry. >=20 > I'm... not sure how that answers my question? I'm saying "if we had a VM= +JIT, > and the JIT part made feature X acceptably fast but it wasn't acceptably = fast > with just the VM, is that a problem?" Or is that a situation that cannot > happen? Or that we don't care if it happens? Everything is possible, but I don't think very realistic now. When some features are going to depend on JIT, we might have much better=20 JIT then now. Thanks. Dmitry. >=20 > --Larry Garfield >=20