Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:71178
Return-Path: <are.you.winning@gmail.com>
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net
Received: (qmail 6006 invoked from network); 16 Jan 2014 11:12:27 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1)
  by localhost with SMTP; 16 Jan 2014 11:12:27 -0000
Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=are.you.winning@gmail.com; sender-id=pass
Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=are.you.winning@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.216.180 as permitted sender)
X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: are.you.winning@gmail.com
X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.216.180 mail-qc0-f180.google.com  
Received: from [209.85.216.180] ([209.85.216.180:50795] helo=mail-qc0-f180.google.com)
	by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP
	id DA/E2-24763-99EB7D25 for <internals@lists.php.net>; Thu, 16 Jan 2014 06:12:26 -0500
Received: by mail-qc0-f180.google.com with SMTP id i17so2101904qcy.25
        for <internals@lists.php.net>; Thu, 16 Jan 2014 03:12:23 -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:date:message-id:subject
         :from:to:cc:content-type;
        bh=U4hLbj4pXjexQf0CqNfORYeeZcV3Wnv5gUKz/+bvWP4=;
        b=dfl849+n/nHvBu72EJLrLka7tcWbFcVulCVa6GHPg5lTeCs2V/SVDZKk0wv5iLnpb8
         y/DlLxg1wmMNzaSqQ+quy6ZnEUgXt0T8vMQFiFEjI36sTMKonoVuthEHIhArefg3+2Km
         DMvBpRyc4/qHz1MmgNdsePyVWfxuM3GHn8kXgEWExYiQMweiHFUjFkMt2amJP2Vdbrj3
         5rrvwZ2qRB7pWiETj6eTOhDZk9199S6imcUnUo87yrYrnuNERpKb/XRb/ILBwgJjGhlZ
         /XMhnmb92GobLv3TPeqzAMMFjtyaHmJ+nG7X0N5tBeng1YpnfWwWUOSAYsv3HZgDF1cL
         bUjA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.224.67.137 with SMTP id r9mr14668203qai.8.1389870743375;
 Thu, 16 Jan 2014 03:12:23 -0800 (PST)
Sender: are.you.winning@gmail.com
Received: by 10.229.240.193 with HTTP; Thu, 16 Jan 2014 03:12:23 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <0B.B1.24763.139B7D25@pb1.pair.com>
References: <CABDNdAGCH5i9-=4Ys1CXeNaGWGmX=mkTiq0b7BbUKtBPdQ9XVg@mail.gmail.com>
	<001301cf1227$6d082ab0$47188010$@tutteli.ch>
	<CABDNdAHZTcE09kS-r_XTGOE9Q5EjTsEQyvzd29q0_nUqnPRrfQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAF9U7z-qR-JnXmbuS-ok2NnB_QzecM1Z4MGhek77rktdSYmcmQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CADyq6s+KqD4Sp00NcJKDAAxX+xWT4x1C3_D1zMVqZ1PRKf__9w@mail.gmail.com>
	<002d01cf1234$01e6dc60$05b49520$@tutteli.ch>
	<CABDNdAEAQyyLQXFw3tw8S9Rb=+9Z-k1K_geX6HG7x1reCoJ5Rw@mail.gmail.com>
	<004c01cf123d$35730870$a0591950$@tutteli.ch>
	<52D71748.1090402@googlemail.com>
	<52D71FAE.8030002@ajf.me>
	<005001cf124f$3a40df00$aec29d00$@tutteli.ch>
	<CAEp07h_KDafvOMzxVmgQq1XMeO_N3CWdFCN0vVgdxXtEn6imKg@mail.gmail.com>
	<20140116110127.202079vzjsj76n7b@webmail.tutteli.ch>
	<0B.B1.24763.139B7D25@pb1.pair.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 11:12:23 +0000
X-Google-Sender-Auth: yhauNjW7dd_SKhRsrHlRyyt6Mwo
Message-ID: <CAGAGxbZPacFrvxAwSx_hO6Xpkn4mV3AHA=c74f92fCKfWgiS6w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Matthieu Napoli <matthieu@mnapoli.fr>
Cc: "internals@lists.php.net" <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Introducing "Array Of" RFC
From: daverandom@php.net (Chris Wright)

On 16 January 2014 10:49, Matthieu Napoli <matthieu@mnapoli.fr> wrote:
> The performance penalty is the same as if you were type-checking yourself.

(Sorry if I'm stepping on your toes here Joe, since it was you who
pointed this out to me):

This is not completely true. With arrayof, there are two iterations of
the passed value - one in C and one in PHP, vs only one iteration in
the foreach/instanceof approach.

However:

- as you point out, the performance penalty for the check is
negligible if it even exists
- if you don't use the syntax there is no penalty whatsoever

so for me this is a complete non-issue. The concise syntax and strong
semantic possibilities this brings far outweigh a few microseconds of
slowdown.

Thanks, Chris