Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:61841 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 14939 invoked from network); 27 Jul 2012 14:00:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 27 Jul 2012 14:00:15 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=lester@lsces.co.uk; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=lester@lsces.co.uk; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain lsces.co.uk from 213.123.26.188 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: lester@lsces.co.uk X-Host-Fingerprint: 213.123.26.188 c2beaomr10.btconnect.com Received: from [213.123.26.188] ([213.123.26.188:59908] helo=mail.btconnect.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 73/B5-14209-CEE92105 for ; Fri, 27 Jul 2012 10:00:13 -0400 Received: from host81-138-11-136.in-addr.btopenworld.com (EHLO _10.0.0.5_) ([81.138.11.136]) by c2beaomr10.btconnect.com with ESMTP id IIU15723; Fri, 27 Jul 2012 15:00:01 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: <50129EE0.7030500@lsces.co.uk> Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2012 15:00:00 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120604 Firefox/13.0 SeaMonkey/2.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: PHP internals References: <500EEA76.1030407@ajf.me> <5010138D.5050804@ajf.me> <501015B9.6050704@ajf.me> <501058B9.5050004@lsces.co.uk> <501249B6.5070507@lsces.co.uk> <50128825.4020902@lsces.co.uk> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mirapoint-IP-Reputation: reputation=Fair-1, source=Queried, refid=tid=0001.0A0B0301.50129EE0.011A, actions=tag X-Junkmail-Premium-Raw: score=7/50, refid=2.7.2:2012.7.27.133622:17:7.944, ip=81.138.11.136, rules=__MOZILLA_MSGID, __HAS_MSGID, __SANE_MSGID, __HAS_FROM, __USER_AGENT, __MIME_VERSION, __TO_MALFORMED_2, __BOUNCE_CHALLENGE_SUBJ, __BOUNCE_NDR_SUBJ_EXEMPT, __SUBJ_ALPHA_END, __CT, __CT_TEXT_PLAIN, __CTE, __ANY_URI, __URI_NO_MAILTO, __URI_NO_WWW, __CP_URI_IN_BODY, BODY_ENDS_IN_URL, BODY_SIZE_1300_1399, BODYTEXTP_SIZE_3000_LESS, __MIME_TEXT_ONLY, RDNS_GENERIC_POOLED, HTML_00_01, HTML_00_10, BODY_SIZE_5000_LESS, RDNS_SUSP_GENERIC, RDNS_SUSP, BODY_SIZE_2000_LESS, BODY_SIZE_7000_LESS X-Junkmail-Status: score=10/50, host=c2beaomr10.btconnect.com X-Junkmail-Signature-Raw: score=unknown, refid=str=0001.0A0B020A.50129EE1.003E:SCFSTAT14830815,ss=1,re=-4.000,fgs=0, ip=0.0.0.0, so=2011-07-25 19:15:43, dmn=2011-05-27 18:58:46, mode=multiengine X-Junkmail-IWF: false Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Generators in PHP From: lester@lsces.co.uk (Lester Caine) Sherif Ramadan wrote: > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/generators#performance > > "You can find a small micro benchmark at > https://gist.github.com/2975796. It compares several ways of iterating > ranges:" > > What part of this discussion led you to believe such a ridiculous > argument as to why generator were introduced? I'm glad to see that > while seeking reason you are also demonstrating it. The micro benchmark is just that, and is not as far as I can see testing the sort of iterating process that would happen normally when going through a data set. It simply times the iterator, but does not compare like with like! The question I am asking is if USING 'xrange' to feed a feed a function and use the results is faster than 'urange' simply using the iterator to call the handling function DIRECTLY. To fix this benchmark what I am missing is how the 'yield' approach would be used to build the $result[] array. This may be obvious to some of you, but I'm missing something to help me understand just what is planned here :( -- Lester Caine - G8HFL ----------------------------- Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk