Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:126021
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3826.200.121\))
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] opcache_compile_file() declares top-level functions
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2024 11:48:46 +0100
References: <CAPyj-LD+X-XZoc5kZmW2qTCuu1-q5NtqEZyZhEs0rhvXa2AyJg@mail.gmail.com>
 <A4F812D1-2C6F-4621-A663-3B98A5F6C8E1@gmail.com>
 <09E90996-133F-47FD-878F-5D1F7A99A3ED@rwec.co.uk>
To: internals@lists.php.net
In-Reply-To: <09E90996-133F-47FD-878F-5D1F7A99A3ED@rwec.co.uk>
Message-ID: <EFC142CD-4F80-429A-BE5B-9624B493BD08@gmail.com>
From: daniil.gentili@gmail.com (Daniil Gentili)


> This reads rather awkwardly, because you're claiming to speak for some =
unknown users ("those who used it") and even for the reader of the =
message ("it does what you expect it to do").
>=20

I speak for myself (and some others, as can be seen by pull requests on =
some FOSS projects, which made pull requests to account for this =
behaviour), as a user of preloading who has encountered this behaviour, =
understood the reason for it and made the required changes to keep using =
it.

> More helpful would be to say how *you* use it, or where you have seen =
it used. Evidently it wasn't obvious to Ilija, and wasn't what they =
expected. Since it's not mentioned in the manual, it's not what I would =
have expected either.
>=20

It was indeed not mentioned in the manual, and preloading is used so =
rarely (as you can see, not even Ilija has been using it) that it seems =
no one even thought of updating it :)

> Ilija also went to some length to describe real practical problems, so =
just saying there's "nothing wrong with this behaviour" also seems =
unhelpful. Perhaps you could expand on why you think the problems =
illustrated aren't significant in practice?
> I would also be interested to know if you think the difference in =
behaviour between classes and functions is explicitly useful, or just =
neutral to your use case.=20

There is indeed nothing wrong with the listed behaviours IMO, as they =
make sense for how the current logic is working, and aren=E2=80=99t a =
deal breaker for preloading.

In fact preloading in a way behaves as if you included the preload file =
before including the entry point, and doing that even without preloading =
would issue the same behaviour: functions cannot be declared twice, and =
already-declared classes are not autoloaded again, so no error is =
emitted (when preloading no error would be emitted anyway for =
redeclaration of classes, but in the vast majority of cases when using =
composer already declared classes are not re-included by the autoloader, =
so the end result is the same).

If functions could be autoloaded this edge case could be avoided without =
having to add include guards, but alternatively, it might be a nice idea =
to simply ignore the redeclaration of functions (like for classes), =
instead of not preloading them at all.

Regards,
Daniil Gentili.=