Newsgroups: php.apc.dev,php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.apc.dev:190 php.internals:43176 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 92669 invoked from network); 26 Feb 2009 14:07:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 26 Feb 2009 14:07:14 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=surreal.w00t@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=surreal.w00t@gmail.com; sender-id=pass; domainkeys=bad Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.218.180 as permitted sender) DomainKey-Status: bad X-DomainKeys: Ecelerity dk_validate implementing draft-delany-domainkeys-base-01 X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: surreal.w00t@gmail.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.218.180 mail-bw0-f180.google.com Received: from [209.85.218.180] ([209.85.218.180:36958] helo=mail-bw0-f180.google.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id AF/19-44668-012A6A94 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2009 09:07:13 -0500 Received: by bwz28 with SMTP id 28so593381bwz.23 for ; Thu, 26 Feb 2009 06:07:10 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:sender:reply-to:received :in-reply-to:references:date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=6d23WWeL2/q/PhkCsDcytGyyMcIlJqSDStVw1PRr1xA=; b=lVpJ58lzDdgRT6WYvd2Hhv/vnLUtxBmh8odFFeOG0ez/EYkPOv9jJ5kyt13sN6tBfw OT3pMgO0FPgBpojkNRTNsxGgRqLzUYo5DT7milKOLNjLdhWe9n72L9/aqVm5sR8OFcbM P74n/hl28APaKm+BjezSGu0xTQh1KETk/l9w0= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:reply-to:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=vnvX6aiQQ1twT+WGNyl+CzZUY0EK7TVPCo/vas+xLKNiDVi424nXs4X3ORPpwT9ToP hJbIrVQoBGwxML9ZVsjTc8SUcLfSpiItu+VzZn+RSNAHV5lBbmYuA0cPPXaVcXBzyBRA VwXFj4mLodhjrbzKpODckFs+xtL4WA4kzStdk= MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: surreal.w00t@gmail.com Reply-To: viroteck@viroteck.net Received: by 10.181.155.9 with SMTP id h9mr459787bko.176.1235657229988; Thu, 26 Feb 2009 06:07:09 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <2E.38.44668.710A6A94@pb1.pair.com> References: <49A097FE.10205@tekrat.com> <633918AD-16DE-4B34-A76E-E90A21E325B3@opus1.com> <49A0F6D6.3080605@tekrat.com> <6A41B9D3-7312-49F3-A4B0-C5D6DC23AF9D@Opus1.COM> <2E.38.44668.710A6A94@pb1.pair.com> Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 14:07:09 +0000 X-Google-Sender-Auth: ee7f61fe7b0e93f1 Message-ID: To: Rodrigo Saboya Cc: apc-dev@lists.php.net, internals@lists.php.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] APC/PHP Lazy Loading From: viroteck@viroteck.net (Robin Burchell) On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 1:58 PM, Rodrigo Saboya wrote: > For the average PHP programmer, the language will simply "get faster". That > can't be bad in any way. It doesn't encourage you to write bad code, it just > doesn't kick you in the nuts when you do. It's probably also worth noting that in a lot of cases, you really *won't* use a lot of what you load, at least initially. If you're working in an OOP fashion, for example, you won't use every method at once on an object, but you're still going to have to pull the whole object in to use it. If you're writing functional code, the same applies: there will often be some generic parts of stuff that you won't use for *every* request that you still won't split out into a seperate file simply because they are *often* used.. I think I'd have to guess that around 40% of the code I load gets used on a single request, but that is because of the aforementioned problem of using classes. It's not that big a worry to me, because I use APC to lessen the hit, and thankfully(? :)) I don't have thousands of r/s, just a few hundred. Seems like a good change to me.