Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:40389 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 21578 invoked from network); 9 Sep 2008 02:07:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 9 Sep 2008 02:07:41 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=sv_forums@fmethod.com; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=sv_forums@fmethod.com; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain fmethod.com from 69.16.228.148 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: sv_forums@fmethod.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 69.16.228.148 unknown Linux 2.4/2.6 Received: from [69.16.228.148] ([69.16.228.148:38531] helo=host.fmethod.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id FA/11-14433-C6AD5C84 for ; Mon, 08 Sep 2008 22:07:40 -0400 Received: from [83.228.56.37] (port=3429 helo=pc) by host.fmethod.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Kcsdl-0006GG-A2 for internals@lists.php.net; Mon, 08 Sep 2008 21:07:37 -0500 Message-ID: To: "PHP Internals" References: <48C5CDF8.3060108@zend.com> Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2008 05:07:32 +0300 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="utf-8"; reply-type=response Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5512 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579 X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - host.fmethod.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - lists.php.net X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - fmethod.com Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Suggestion to increase the max_input_nesting_level From: sv_forums@fmethod.com ("Stan Vassilev | FM") Hi, He means recursion depth, not input nesting depth. 5.3 had a proposed fast function call algorithm which would avoid the stack limit and allow deeper recursion, was this accepted and how does it affect the limit of 100 nested calls? Regards, Stan Vassilev > Hi! > >> Currently I'm working on the compiler, which has this BNF: >> http://trac.doctrine-project.org/browser/trunk/query-language.txt >> I've done a lot of optimizations to be able to not touch the default >> nesting input level, but doing that I added a lot of restrictions that >> now are my bottlenecks. > > I'm not sure I understand - how this compiler is related to input nesting > level? What exactly you do there that requires 150+ levels of nesting on > input?