Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:83963
Return-Path: <laruence@gmail.com>
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net
Received: (qmail 80529 invoked from network); 27 Feb 2015 06:53:40 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1)
  by localhost with SMTP; 27 Feb 2015 06:53:40 -0000
Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=laruence@gmail.com; sender-id=pass
Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=laruence@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.217.171 as permitted sender)
X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: laruence@gmail.com
X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.217.171 mail-lb0-f171.google.com  
Received: from [209.85.217.171] ([209.85.217.171:39633] helo=mail-lb0-f171.google.com)
	by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP
	id 29/C1-32582-27410F45 for <internals@lists.php.net>; Fri, 27 Feb 2015 01:53:39 -0500
Received: by lbvn10 with SMTP id n10so15428186lbv.6
        for <internals@lists.php.net>; Thu, 26 Feb 2015 22:53:36 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to
         :content-type;
        bh=B7gcujOK6xvwm7DY3el4iadyLd/gh2uZKcisF5ARmOw=;
        b=OgOpnhi6Vtddt7S3cuLahUIkvN9cSYkRy5LoarGH7pAd5BpZLfqsA9D6cVlrYGOiru
         AZy0tdedgUrbGW6ZH802LZP2MXQ4fnmYtk9tM86r8qe4RZfPDaXMJf3Ony/8p5QyZGpq
         Z79a3VYWpfZurRhtE4Av2cbPvDRWk1p9xubi/RIWwNH9wpApNoXgv/hW031cnQxyr/ma
         HbKXwFVYg1GR+qgnwSOfU/dXWGRu8l4roNYx7HWhmeOzFAifhQyeSQ/rPlAqJtvuDZC6
         ldGDxB+KOPg8edapHBbio+LsmHYAixeeTxUTCSZrk1Uq6SbZO2wTok8WVubZk2O9Y6F6
         VHIA==
X-Received: by 10.112.173.133 with SMTP id bk5mr11017002lbc.94.1425020016317;
 Thu, 26 Feb 2015 22:53:36 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.114.28.198 with HTTP; Thu, 26 Feb 2015 22:53:16 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CABBJUpd8f8ApcPqJp6d5ih0Bywkk4LUnFdQOD=ovL1U6nhid0Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABBJUpd8f8ApcPqJp6d5ih0Bywkk4LUnFdQOD=ovL1U6nhid0Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 14:53:16 +0800
Message-ID: <CABBJUpf63s3_Yp2o2_YdWYZJKVPqVTR+94qXmZUU7R5=8NiJrQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: PHP Internals <internals@lists.php.net>, Dmitry Stogov <dmitry@zend.com>, 
	Bob Weinand <bobwei9@hotmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Subject: Re: About optimization for compiler
From: laruence@gmail.com (Xinchen Hui)

Hey:

On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 2:22 PM, Xinchen Hui <laruence@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey Internals:
>
>       I was looking Bob's switch optimization..
And, I am not against this switch optimization..

I referring it to show where is my concerns came from

thanks
>
>       then I start to worry about where is the place optimization should goes..
>
>       in generally, PHP is a  interpreted language. IMO, it should
> compiler the PHP codes to opcode without any optimization(of course,
> we did some, but they won't change a lots of opcodes which should be
> generated)..
>
>       and, since 5.5, we already have opcache bundled in..
>
>       thus, I am proposing a principle, that is:
>
>       in the future, we only do optimization in opcache side, and keep
> Zend Compiler without any optimization... considering Zend Compiler do
> things in -O0.
>
>       since, optimization always are dangerous.. if we only do them in
> opcache, user can still run them codes with disable opcache, or at
> least disable some optimization level which cause that..
>
>       what do you think?
>
> thanks
>
> --
> Xinchen Hui
> @Laruence
> http://www.laruence.com/



-- 
Xinchen Hui
@Laruence
http://www.laruence.com/