On 23/10/06, Derick Rethans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, 23 Oct 2006, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
> > > Yes, I see no point in pushing this responsibility into the userland,
> > > especially since its a BC break appearently.
> >
> > There is no BC break:
>
> I meant, there would be a BC break if this feature gets dropped, which is the
> point of the message, right?
Yeah, but there is no point in calling mktime() without arguments as you
can use time() doing the same. It's just a friendly hint that you're
wasting CPU cycles. It's an E_STRICT message for ****s sake.
In a simple test, 100000 calls to time() took 0.055 seconds and
mktime() took 3.2 seconds.
Nearly 60 times faster to use time().
Didn't realise that.
--
-----
Richard Quadling
Zend Certified Engineer : http://zend.com/zce.php?c=ZEND002498&r=213474731
"Standing on the shoulders of some very clever giants!"
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
