Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:30784 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 51812 invoked by uid 1010); 11 Jul 2007 13:16:21 -0000 Delivered-To: ezmlm-scan-internals@lists.php.net Delivered-To: ezmlm-internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 51778 invoked from network); 11 Jul 2007 13:16:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 11 Jul 2007 13:16:20 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=mls@pooteeweet.org; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=mls@pooteeweet.org; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain pooteeweet.org from 212.112.227.169 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: mls@pooteeweet.org X-Host-Fingerprint: 212.112.227.169 ipx11223.ipxserver.de Linux 2.5 (sometimes 2.4) (4) Received: from [212.112.227.169] ([212.112.227.169:45122] helo=ipx11223.ipxserver.de) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id C7/23-24398-328D4964 for ; Wed, 11 Jul 2007 09:16:20 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ipx11223.ipxserver.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC2CCDF012C; Wed, 11 Jul 2007 15:16:09 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ipx11223.ipxserver.de ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (flottensignalgeber [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 18399-01; Wed, 11 Jul 2007 15:16:06 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [192.168.1.114] (234.24.3.213.fix.bluewin.ch [213.3.24.234]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ipx11223.ipxserver.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3312FDF0005; Wed, 11 Jul 2007 15:16:06 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: References: <468E5AB1.3080308@lerdorf.com> <468E5E3B.5090408@zend.com> <468E66B2.3060903@lerdorf.com> <468E6E0E.9020309@sci.fi> <468E7237.7060104@zend.com> <468E73A6.3090004@sci.fi> <37.15.59649.247C4964@pb1.pair.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.3) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Message-ID: <307CE332-4504-4FAE-96E4-0D9D27835EAF@pooteeweet.org> Cc: "Sebastian Mendel" , internals@lists.php.net Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 15:16:02 +0200 To: David Coallier X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.3) X-Virus-Scanned: by somedaemon at backendmedia.com Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] RIP PHP 4? From: mls@pooteeweet.org (Lukas Kahwe Smith) On 11.07.2007, at 15:11, David Coallier wrote: > On 7/11/07, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote: >> >> On 11.07.2007, at 14:06, Sebastian Mendel wrote: >> >> > +1 >> > >> > Guilherme Blanco schrieb: >> > >> >> Have you ever asked yourselves... why? why PHP5's adoption is >> so bad? >> > >> > it was badly advertised! >> > >> > most people don't even know how much faster it is! >> > to say nothing about of all the new features not known by most >> > developers! >> > (of course - most people here now them) >> >> well actually php 5.0 was slower for many things .. objects where >> slightly faster. 5.1 and now 5.2 bring the performance/quality up to >> where things where with php 4 at the time. >> > > Fun :)) After 4 years php5 is now as fast as php4 :O well now i would assume its faster ... especially since the amount of OO happy code has increased. the last round of benchmarks i remember showed 5.1 to be more or less on par or faster. so now with 5.2 i would hope that we are now mostly faster across the board. would be nice to have performance regression measurement as part of the test suite. regards, Lukas