Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:10447 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 64304 invoked by uid 1010); 14 Jun 2004 17:20:10 -0000 Delivered-To: ezmlm-scan-internals@lists.php.net Delivered-To: ezmlm-internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 64250 invoked from network); 14 Jun 2004 17:20:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.academyoflearning.ca) (216.232.111.184) by pb1.pair.com with SMTP; 14 Jun 2004 17:20:10 -0000 Received: from [192.168.1.10] (d142-179-62-120.bchsia.telus.net [142.179.62.120]) (using SSLv3 with cipher RC4-MD5 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.academyoflearning.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEA782453A; Mon, 14 Jun 2004 10:19:47 -0700 (PDT) To: Christian Schneider Cc: Alexander Valyalkin , internals@lists.php.net In-Reply-To: <40CD828C.5070908@cschneid.com> References: <40CC1D3C.9070605@php.net> <40CD828C.5070908@cschneid.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2004 10:19:45 -0700 Message-ID: <1087233585.5169.90.camel@ipso.snappymail.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 1.5.9.1-1mdk Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-snappymail-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-snappymail-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-snappymail-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, SpamAssassin (score=2.215, required 5, AWL -0.48, RCVD_IN_DYNABLOCK 2.60, RCVD_IN_SORBS 0.10) X-snappymail-MailScanner-SpamScore: ss X-MailScanner-From: ipso@snappymail.ca Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: crc32() improvements From: ipso@snappymail.ca (Mike Benoit) On Mon, 2004-06-14 at 12:48 +0200, Christian Schneider wrote: > Alexander Valyalkin wrote: > > It is only idle talk. Can you provide any string from my code which > > violates your "coding standards"? > > Calm down. As I said before (obviously not clearly enough, I was hoping > one of the 'project managers' would do that for me ;-)) you are missing > the point why people reject your code. > > Facts are: > a) People here are not interested in rewriting already working functions > which have a REASONABLE speed. Why would people not be interested in speed improvements? Especially when they involve functions (crc32 and serialize) that do the heavy lifting in many caching implementations, such as Smarty and PEAR:: Cache_Lite. A 40% improvement, if true, would be pretty damn nice to say the least. I sure could use performance increases in this area as caching is key to my ACL class (http://phpgacl.sourceforge.net/) being usable on high volume sites. -- Mike Benoit