Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:96230
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain brzuchalski.com designates 188.165.245.118 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <BLU436-SMTP2531A6F8897A1C9D3E9E0FCE2C50@phx.gbl>
References: <004101d21e33$124edf90$36ec9eb0$@lool.fr> <3bc3c57695cdf6207724db47e6dbbbab@koti.fimnet.fi>
 <000401d21e4c$3e71d140$bb5573c0$@lool.fr> <BLU436-SMTP2531A6F8897A1C9D3E9E0FCE2C50@phx.gbl>
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2016 17:52:10 +0200
Message-ID: <CABdc3Wp=GbdkauhvowJDqTb9M+spDWXniQea+TjLae7OxkjkaQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Bob Weinand <bobwei9@hotmail.com>
Cc: Pascal KISSIAN <php-mailing-list@lool.fr>, PHP internals list <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11400a002adb6b053e0c0b73
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Feature Request: inline pseudo-instruction
From: michal@brzuchalski.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Micha=C5=82_Brzuchalski?=)

--001a11400a002adb6b053e0c0b73
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

2016-10-04 17:39 GMT+02:00 Bob Weinand <bobwei9@hotmail.com>:

>
> > Am 4.10.2016 um 16:33 schrieb Pascal KISSIAN <php-mailing-list@lool.fr>=
:
> >
> >> -----Message d'origine-----
> >> De : Lauri Kentt=C3=A4 [mailto:lauri.kentta@gmail.com]
> >> Envoy=C3=A9 : mardi 4 octobre 2016 16:21
> >> =C3=80 : Pascal KISSIAN <php-mailing-list@lool.fr>
> >> Cc : internals@lists.php.net
> >> Objet : Re: [PHP-DEV] Feature Request: inline pseudo-instruction
> >>
> >> On 2016-10-04 14:33, Pascal KISSIAN wrote:
> >>> I have an application where a small file is included at multiple
> >>> places.
> >>>
> >>> The include is done about an average of 100.000 times .
> >>
> >> I'm just wondering if you have ever heard of functions? You really
> should write a function, include it only once, and then simply call the
> function instead of repeatedly >including the file. Calling a function is=
 a
> lot faster than including a file.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Lauri Kentt=C3=A4
> >
> > Function is not appropriate when the "inlined code" has to share 20-30
> local variables ...
> > Having a function with 30 args,  or having to build and access an array
> is not very efficient nor natural...
> > Local variables include 6 nested "for loop" indices and local
> variables/arrays needed for the computing.
>

6-level nested loop and 20-30 local variables in scope has enought
complexity to refactor. This stuff definitelly needs refactor.
I wouldn't allow any developer to commit such code, it woudn't pass code
review.
There was time I also have such code but it wasn't maintainable, once
written was never beeing understood by any other developer.
I think you should read about CleanCode ->
https://www.amazon.com/Clean-Code-Handbook-Software-Craftsmanship/dp/013235=
0882


> Hey,
>
> why do you think are your includes so slow?
> Apart from the include itself (which in itself is fairly slow due to
> filesystem access; or in case with opcache, at the very least copying the
> op_array etc.), it does exactly this: building an array and importing it
> into the included files scope.
>
> Also, 20-30 local variables? That sounds a bit like your code has way too
> many responsibilities in one same place. Perhaps you should restructure
> your code instead, but the way you describe it, no.
>
> If your code is so "hot", that also even function calls would be quite
> significant then you should probably really inline your code there as a
> perf optimization. Anyway, code with that many variables almost always ca=
n
> meaningfully refactored.
>
> It is not the languages task to optimize insane code ...
>
> Bob
>
>
>
>
>


--=20
regards / pozdrawiam,
--
Micha=C5=82 Brzuchalski
brzuchalski.com

--001a11400a002adb6b053e0c0b73--