Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:93441
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain pthreads.org from 209.85.161.172 cause and error)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAMUwpuRqcqdZzWYsL8fuB=DUayaj9HQS04eqy3Vpoeq80nbPKA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAL=_i_mcJoFnPgeU5FQCJN=SDYnNK7Jz8zoVMv9EMuWaGRYSMg@mail.gmail.com>
	<BY2PR0201MB17843672AD6CE2C492793B98BF4E0@BY2PR0201MB1784.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
	<eaf60d62-cf57-b517-b8ab-ff6acd1b2a93@gmail.com>
	<CAMUwpuRqcqdZzWYsL8fuB=DUayaj9HQS04eqy3Vpoeq80nbPKA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 23 May 2016 11:16:22 +0100
Message-ID: <CAL=_i_n_8aEn5gomvZGPrAC8VXaVVKYLWj8tHG0Rpaq=OHvBtg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Julien Pauli <jpauli@php.net>
Cc: Stanislav Malyshev <smalyshev@gmail.com>, Dmitry Stogov <dmitry@zend.com>, 
	PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>, Phil Sturgeon <pjsturgeon@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1141e82a71673705337fbbc0
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC][Vote] Typed Properties
From: pthreads@pthreads.org (Joe Watkins)

--001a1141e82a71673705337fbbc0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Morning internals,

    I have improved the performance of the patch a little, here's the
results of a bad run:

    krakjoe@fiji:/usr/src/php-src$ sapi/cli/php -n prop.php
    empty_loop         0.064
    write_prop1()      0.088    0.025
    write_prop2()      0.079    0.016
    write_prop3()      0.082    0.018
    ------------------------
    Total              0.314

    There is going to be overhead, not the kind we can't minimize, or
justify though.

    Dmitry has said he'll review, and I'm hoping at least Laruence, Nikita,
and Bob will do the same ...

    We have many weeks to improve the implementation, I'm not going to
merge anything that's obviously bad :)

Cheers
Joe


On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 10:54 AM, Julien Pauli <jpauli@php.net> wrote:

> On Mon, May 23, 2016 at 11:09 AM, Stanislav Malyshev
> <smalyshev@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> >> The performance effect of this implementation is terrible.
> >>
> >> Assignment to typed property is 2.3 times slower.
> >> Assignment to untyped property in a class with typed properties is 1.8
> times slower.
> >>
> >> See the benchmark
> >> https://gist.github.com/dstogov/1b678712adeee51665cdd829195bb800
> >
> > This is not good. I wonder why these tests weren't made before the vote
> > and results wheren't added in the RFC. Should we make it a standard
> > practice to do so? Having 2x slowdown on each property access sounds
> > like a bad idea.
>
> The question is :
> * should the vote be an idea-based vote, or integrate the code into the
> vote ?
>
> My vote did not integrate the code, but the feature.
>
> The idea is that if the RFC passes, then the feature is agreed, and we
> still have some time to find a better implementation.
> If we could not find one, then the feature should be abandoned or
> post-poned until a new patch. If the new patch changes the
> implementation, then the RFC should be reopened.
>
> My thoughts.
>
> Julien.Pauli
>

--001a1141e82a71673705337fbbc0--