Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:33616
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.146.179 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Status: bad
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references;
        b=VRpAoP9zFYvOWUqpMuKhLW5BYlCqWGp0xvirHw+FtzxfgzYz1TZVxqFQK23F175p0WwOs+JFOM8XkCBXLQiESD8z+AE0w6Jqwxx9kxchMM7XhunjJBufwySQ4Kv3vXI1uzaL2ENAwEm53cuvQy9wphcxOa9Wf2bJBV+Q4MIzDcw=
Message-ID: <30bd80240712031605y326d886fl6197839a60eeedcf@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2007 19:05:38 -0500
To: "Stanislav Malyshev" <stas@zend.com>
Cc: "Gregory Beaver" <greg@chiaraquartet.net>, 
	"internals Mailing List" <internals@lists.php.net>
In-Reply-To: <47548031.20608@zend.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; 
	boundary="----=_Part_13197_14375267.1196726738087"
References: <4731278C.8020301@chiaraquartet.net> <4731F977.4080502@zend.com>
	 <4753B087.4020206@chiaraquartet.net> <47548031.20608@zend.com>
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] ignored patches
From: nicobn@gmail.com ("=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Nicolas_B=E9rard-Nault?=")

------=_Part_13197_14375267.1196726738087
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

Hi Stats,

Everybody is providing clear and proven results. You are the only one who is
throwing around hypothetical numbers (that 5% figure comes out of your
head). Can you please be more responsible and provide some real results ?

Also, pretty much every feature of a language can be abused. From my point
of view, using autoload for every class IS abusive (as we all know, thanks
to many benchmarks, that it affects performance negatively). But I don't
defend its abolition because of that.

Thank you kindly,
Nicolas.

On Dec 3, 2007 5:16 PM, Stanislav Malyshev <stas@zend.com> wrote:

> > Remember, we both found, independently, that combining separate files
> > yields from a 10-30% performance increase.  I have only talked to 2
>
> On synthetic benchmarks. On real apps, which do databases, calculations,
> network, etc. that would be probably no more than 5%, probably even
> less. And I don't see any application shipping in this format.
>
> This is a very problematic issue - adding a feature into a language that
> serves only very specific very narrow performance scenario but which
> will inevitably be widely abused in cases which have nothing to do with
> that scenario.
>
> > the feature unnecessary.  If you'd like, I could put you in contact with
> > developers who have been struggling with combining files for several
> > years now.
>
> Why were they "struggling" - only problem existing with it is
> namespaces, and they certainly couldn't try to use namespaces for years?
> If they had other problems, they will keep having them and multiple
> namespaces per file are not going to help them.
>
> > Anecdotally, I heard of a recent file-combining optimization to a very
> > popular CMS that resulted in a 45% performance improvement.  Improving
>
> Did they use bytecode caching?
> Anyway, I have hard time believing PHP include is so broken, but if it
> is - it should be fixed, not through creating syntax-level workarounds
> but directly.
>
>  > really the only reason not to implement the multiple namespaces
> per-file
>
> I think I described my reasons now multiple times.
> --
> Stanislav Malyshev, Zend Software Architect
> stas@zend.com   http://www.zend.com/
> (408)253-8829   MSN: stas@zend.com
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>

------=_Part_13197_14375267.1196726738087--