Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:68583 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 39368 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2013 15:50:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 20 Aug 2013 15:50:48 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=johannes@schlueters.de; sender-id=unknown Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=johannes@schlueters.de; spf=permerror; sender-id=unknown Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain schlueters.de from 217.114.215.10 cause and error) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: johannes@schlueters.de X-Host-Fingerprint: 217.114.215.10 unknown Received: from [217.114.215.10] ([217.114.215.10:54733] helo=config.schlueters.de) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id E5/DC-11927-15093125 for ; Tue, 20 Aug 2013 11:50:41 -0400 Received: from [192.168.2.20] (ppp-188-174-57-242.dynamic.mnet-online.de [188.174.57.242]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: johannes@schlueters.de) by config.schlueters.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id ABB155BBA4; Tue, 20 Aug 2013 17:50:38 +0200 (CEST) To: Terry Ellison Cc: "internals@lists.php.net" In-Reply-To: <52138C87.5060705@gmail.com> References: <5212423A.4000801@gmail.com> <1376941908.4056.42.camel@guybrush> <52138C87.5060705@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2013 17:50:18 +0200 Message-ID: <1377013818.4056.95.camel@guybrush> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.30.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Which OSs and SAPI should PHP 5.6 support? From: johannes@schlueters.de (Johannes =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Schl=FCter?=) Hi, I'll get back on the other things later, but a short comment (flaming) on this: On Tue, 2013-08-20 at 16:34 +0100, Terry Ellison wrote: > > PHP (unlike some language alternatives) seems to be doing little to > improve general performance, and the discussions related to > performance on this DL are almost non-existent. Looking at any benchmark from 5.2 to 5.3 to 5.4 and 5.5 shows notable improvements (5.4 to 5.5 maybe not as much as the others) saying we do little is a bit misleading. But well, it is simpler to do these syntax sugar things we're bikeshedding about than doing actual core improvements. We have just very few people fully understanding the engine and being able to improve it. So such discussions gain no traction. johannes