Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:49806 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 43766 invoked from network); 30 Sep 2010 13:31:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 30 Sep 2010 13:31:41 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=johannes@schlueters.de; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=johannes@schlueters.de; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain schlueters.de from 217.114.211.66 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: johannes@schlueters.de X-Host-Fingerprint: 217.114.211.66 unknown Solaris 10 (beta) Received: from [217.114.211.66] ([217.114.211.66:61157] helo=config.schlueters.de) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 40/00-43687-13194AC4 for ; Thu, 30 Sep 2010 09:31:30 -0400 Received: from [192.168.178.31] (p5DCBCD5E.dip.t-dialin.net [93.203.205.94]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by config.schlueters.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 80FFB442AC; Thu, 30 Sep 2010 15:31:22 +0200 (CEST) To: Andre Baumeier Cc: Alex Baumann , internals@lists.php.net In-Reply-To: <111C9250-40A5-4D82-9DD8-9B99D651D652@crossconcept.de> References: <9A.BD.52399.493A28C4@pb1.pair.com> <1283691991.2190.2.camel@guybrush> <111C9250-40A5-4D82-9DD8-9B99D651D652@crossconcept.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 15:31:18 +0200 Message-ID: <1285853478.16846.85.camel@guybrush> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.30.2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Built-in function: between From: johannes@schlueters.de (Johannes =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Schl=FCter?=) On Thu, 2010-09-30 at 15:11 +0200, Andre Baumeier wrote: > Am 05.09.2010 um 15:06 schrieb Johannes Schlüter: > > > preg_match('/PHP (.*) swesome/', 'PHP is awesome', $matches); > > > > preg_match should be slower? Was that a question or a statement? I doubt it is really measurable and not worth adding another special case function. We have enough of them. johannes