Am 6.3.2013 um 23:30 schrieb Will Fitch <wfi...@meetme.com>:
> On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 5:25 PM, Bob Weinand <bobw...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Am 6.3.2013 um 22:50 schrieb Will Fitch <willfi...@php.net>:
>> On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 4:44 PM, Bob Weinand <bobw...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> Am 06.03.2013 um 22:39 schrieb "Will Fitch" <willfi...@php.net>:
>>> On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 4:10 PM, Bob Weinand <bobw...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hi!
>>> 
>>> As this seem to require a RFC, here is it:
>>> 
>>> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/unset_bool
>>> 
>>> I'm not a fan of this change, but if it's going to be discussed, the RFC 
>>> should include baseline and RFC change benchmarks.  
>>>  
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Please feedback,
>>> 
>>> Bob Weinand
>>> 
>>> --
>>> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
>>> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>> 
>> I don't see here a real need for a benchmark as it is mostly only returning 
>> SUCCESS or FAILURE instead of nothing. Nothing what would slow PHP down.
>> 
>> Any change to a language construct which requires additional processing adds 
>> time.  It may be in minute, but it's part of the discussion.  Since this 
>> core change you're requesting comments for introduces a usecase which many 
>> will not find useful (probably most voting), it is your responsibility to 
>> convince this category of people that the tradeoff won't affect them that 
>> much.
>> 
>> If you choose not to add benchmarking, I will guarantee a -1 from me.
>>  
>> 
>> Bob Weinand
> 
> 
> I have tried the following:
> 
> time ./sapi/cli/php -r 'while($i++ < 1e7) { $a = true; unset($a); }'
> 
> Unpatched: average of 5x executed:
> real  0m4.935s
> user  0m4.925s
> sys   0m0.008s
> 
> Patched: average of 5x executed:
> real  0m4.945s
> user  0m4.938s
> sys   0m0.005s
> 
> 
> Yes, there is an increase of 0.15%. This is 1 nanosecond more than previous.
> 
> Is this exact enough? Or do you need more precision?
> 
> If yes, I'll put this into the RFC.
> 
> Thank you.  Please do add to the RFC
>  
> 
> 
> Bob Weinand

RFC updated.

Any other comments about this RFC?

Bob Weinand

Reply via email to