Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:64765
Return-Path: <derick@php.net>
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net
Received: (qmail 57882 invoked from network); 9 Jan 2013 17:06:46 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1)
  by localhost with SMTP; 9 Jan 2013 17:06:46 -0000
Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=derick@php.net; spf=unknown; sender-id=unknown
Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=derick@php.net; sender-id=unknown
Received-SPF: unknown (pb1.pair.com: domain php.net does not designate 82.113.146.227 as permitted sender)
X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: derick@php.net
X-Host-Fingerprint: 82.113.146.227 xdebug.org Linux 2.6
Received: from [82.113.146.227] ([82.113.146.227:56306] helo=xdebug.org)
	by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP
	id 2E/41-02684-5A3ADE05 for <internals@lists.php.net>; Wed, 09 Jan 2013 12:06:46 -0500
Received: from localhost (xdebug.org [127.0.0.1])
	by xdebug.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B8F0EDE13E;
	Wed,  9 Jan 2013 17:06:41 +0000 (GMT)
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 17:06:41 +0000 (GMT)
X-X-Sender: derick@whisky.home.derickrethans.nl
To: Anthony Ferrara <ircmaxell@gmail.com>
cc: Rasmus Lerdorf <rasmus@lerdorf.com>, 
    "internals@lists.php.net" <internals@lists.php.net>
In-Reply-To: <CAAyV7nGzMc+AkN1wQ5Fgj1B0AefLG2t6fKSrkE-hzpGZR=XEDw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1301091705370.28951@whisky.home.derickrethans.nl>
References: <CAAyV7nGzMc+AkN1wQ5Fgj1B0AefLG2t6fKSrkE-hzpGZR=XEDw@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (DEB 1266 2009-07-14)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Subject: Re: Was Reflection annotations reader - Pull APC in Core Already
From: derick@php.net (Derick Rethans)

On Wed, 9 Jan 2013, Anthony Ferrara wrote:

> Rasmus wrote:
> 
> > This is my worry as well. Especially when it comes to opcode cache 
> > support. Most of the patches I see these days completely ignore the 
> > opcode cache side of things which needs to change. For any large 
> > language-level change, any implementation that doesn't also include 
> > an APC diff, or at least a very complete explanation of how it will 
> > be generally supported by opcode caches just isn't complete.

<snip>

> So I guess my point is rather than passing the message that people 
> making language changes need to think about APC, I think the message 
> should be that APC needs to get into core (and should be made an 
> initiative)... As it stands now, it's just going to keep causing 
> pain...

It was a plan in the past, I think we should just do it - now.

cheers,
Derick

-- 
http://derickrethans.nl | http://xdebug.org
Like Xdebug? Consider a donation: http://xdebug.org/donate.php
twitter: @derickr and @xdebug
Posted with an email client that doesn't mangle email: alpine