Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:64767
Return-Path: <julienpauli@gmail.com>
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net
Received: (qmail 61071 invoked from network); 9 Jan 2013 17:21:29 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1)
  by localhost with SMTP; 9 Jan 2013 17:21:29 -0000
Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=julienpauli@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass
Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=julienpauli@gmail.com; sender-id=pass
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.220.177 as permitted sender)
X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: julienpauli@gmail.com
X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.220.177 mail-vc0-f177.google.com  
Received: from [209.85.220.177] ([209.85.220.177:62051] helo=mail-vc0-f177.google.com)
	by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP
	id 09/F1-02684-817ADE05 for <internals@lists.php.net>; Wed, 09 Jan 2013 12:21:28 -0500
Received: by mail-vc0-f177.google.com with SMTP id m8so1802495vcd.36
        for <internals@lists.php.net>; Wed, 09 Jan 2013 09:21:25 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date
         :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type;
        bh=xRVvupYgqmY5G7A7brVs43cljr2ix6eq5+hxEb8YdY8=;
        b=jy0MNSDETegxffu9HoAQNrn6ovSsStSbXEbVjsRYMXov5f74+dCEQnFcbcbVFBST/e
         Vyh+JzTgne1b0Xz7Gp8TLvvAxfLM6YqmUS/2QDBP6e0Mf3rr5f6MH9XDu+2rhVML6pH5
         27hzpWLRRkvTlbN2P+e8NKv0QrmYQwr+6+11FyADm8XLAsqBvCvkLLDHF0w3C41IsIkj
         s94G16FA/ceoXl5DHA/yzmnzh8L1v9VSZG6/0mLdKWjynpaa9e+ocsG0U/Rvz2LH3hrf
         Uuj4d7/yDYVTOySap2/INZiRQPtJLpc/1OS36Xgf7E37CWZ5E18xNP6PZh2m7Cl78+4S
         5T+A==
Received: by 10.52.174.71 with SMTP id bq7mr78249142vdc.49.1357752085707; Wed,
 09 Jan 2013 09:21:25 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: julienpauli@gmail.com
Received: by 10.220.140.132 with HTTP; Wed, 9 Jan 2013 09:20:44 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1301091705370.28951@whisky.home.derickrethans.nl>
References: <CAAyV7nGzMc+AkN1wQ5Fgj1B0AefLG2t6fKSrkE-hzpGZR=XEDw@mail.gmail.com>
 <alpine.DEB.2.02.1301091705370.28951@whisky.home.derickrethans.nl>
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2013 18:20:44 +0100
X-Google-Sender-Auth: uj1gsVX_vVE3GeVlNRHAMjp6hpQ
Message-ID: <CAMUwpuSsFM5omv32jzeVmA4YgxydLcCHF+hGdvEGT=roiQck3A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Derick Rethans <derick@php.net>
Cc: Anthony Ferrara <ircmaxell@gmail.com>, Rasmus Lerdorf <rasmus@lerdorf.com>, 
	"internals@lists.php.net" <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=bcaec51d2f26c2fb3604d2de4a84
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: Was Reflection annotations reader - Pull APC in
 Core Already
From: jpauli@php.net (Julien Pauli)

--bcaec51d2f26c2fb3604d2de4a84
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 6:06 PM, Derick Rethans <derick@php.net> wrote:

> 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.
>


I fully 100% agree with that.
Reading Rasmus 5min ago on the other topic (annotations) made me think
about writing such a topic again. But Anthony's been faster ;-)

Rasmus, Anthony's arguments make full sense : if any Core feature addition
need to be thought so that APC need to be patched correctly, then we have
to move APC to Core.
Not having at least one default Opcode cache solution in Core, even
disabled by default in runtime configuration really is a nonsense.
And I guess this will solve the "PHP5.4 adoption problem" as well, you see
what I mean, so we won't meet it again in the future. That's been very bad
for 5.4 adoption, and for PHP itself though.

kindly,

Julien.Pauli

--bcaec51d2f26c2fb3604d2de4a84--