Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:62256
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.215.42 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <50306B5E.7050106@sugarcrm.com>
References: <CAF+90c_47HtYHnMztUUb7Gd5_gKhpJYJN=G-KJFSmSt_=w2+Lw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAKZjf5To5crgc2cL87_sbF3QGuxYihbyKzwxs7QLGkXzWqc7CA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAL+t6cF4OK27Wx3RRSgiE1u1zLfn7AzW2SH8PwOg7DN99nezbw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAKZjf5Ri2V8_Bydiygm0nN04ACCC2+mWBDaPqLzB2wqkArR2WQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAH-PCH7gnET8cvN4D4RyqV8bLBDD-TJK1KLMdTd0jicqYLz8Cw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAKZjf5RT9GwDF-rT5VDpo93ZmEirE0opn8Ed7goz7WBkoi86rg@mail.gmail.com>
	<5010138D.5050804@ajf.me>
	<CAH-PCH7o4mW584J8mkeN-7GQ_4nCX7jRx9TX6bbTXW88pPiJ7g@mail.gmail.com>
	<501015B9.6050704@ajf.me>
	<CAKZjf5SWZv+iE8AmjGmZhZr-6=YhO4TAFMQXg6uvA63eSeXHmg@mail.gmail.com>
	<501058B9.5050004@lsces.co.uk>
	<501249B6.5070507@lsces.co.uk>
	<CAF+90c9FdOrztLKH8G8rKhqbLpTKAzqWJr1RK4KQbkJLy91fkg@mail.gmail.com>
	<50128825.4020902@lsces.co.uk>
	<50231FAD.40104@garfieldtech.com>
	<CAL+t6cFRp20Emi-fRqLter8hjPKcQowZTvK0jb9yL2gowQ63bg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAF+90c__Gm3juxAXV3Ep27wO1tAvccz3z7ELCytNFnebkARiZw@mail.gmail.com>
	<50306B5E.7050106@sugarcrm.com>
Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2012 10:58:00 +0200
Message-ID: <CAF+90c8snO7yM7XQG_iVErfz8h+xy6vbv1uttv+2JDFZKY-M5g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@sugarcrm.com>
Cc: Sherif Ramadan <theanomaly.is@gmail.com>, Larry Garfield <larry@garfieldtech.com>, 
	"internals@lists.php.net" <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Generators in PHP
From: nikita.ppv@gmail.com (Nikita Popov)

On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 6:28 AM, Stas Malyshev <smalyshev@sugarcrm.com> wrote:
> Hi!
>
>> For PHP we would need to have some similar behavior. PHP's current
>> exception model is incompatible with GeneratorExitException (because
>> PHP does not have BaseExceptions). So what I'd probably do instead is
>> monkeypatch a ZEND_RETURN opcode at the current execution position and
>
> Patching opcodes is not a good idea, since opcodes could be cached, and
> the cache can be shared between different processes.

Patching a single opcode should be okay, because it does not require
modification of the op_array. Only execute_data->opline has to be
changed (and the execute data is not shared). The exception handling
mechanism currently uses the same technique. It patches an
ZEND_HANDLE_EXCEPTION opcode into the current position.

Nikita