wrote in message news:55fb932f-7f61-33eb-1fd9-aa425bc6f...@rhsoft.net...
Am 05.11.2017 um 11:24 schrieb Tony Marston:
wrote in message news:d70cc49d-c397-3f09-d08d-b79b31014...@rhsoft.net...
it depends on the implementation and just beause you say so does not
prove anything and even if you need to measure, optimize and make
decisions based on technical facts - what you do is "mimimi i say"
I have worked on software which provided lots of different options, which
means that you have to keep testing if an option is being used or not.
This is an overhead whether you like it or not.
maybe your implementation was bad
Everybody knows that carrying around code which is either rarely used or not
used at all is an overhead. That's what the 80-20 rule demonstrates.
Adding something to the language core for something which can already be
done easily is userland code, but with slightly fewer keystrokes, does not
provide any benefits for the majority of developers who have already written
those few lines of code. This is a classic example of pandering to the whims
of a tiny minority to the detriment of the majority.
There is a big difference between adding something to the language core
which everyone has to load into memory, and having something in an
extension which is entirely optional.
or why did 5.3, 5.4, 5.5 and 5.6 not speaking about 7.0/7.1 *all* have
new features and where *faster* then the previous version - frankly
you are raising alarm for no reason
Can you prove that each new version was faster? Where is your evidence?
everbody knows that and can benchmark it at any time, but if it makes you
happy that others are doing your homework
https://www.phpclasses.org/blog/post/493-php-performance-evolution.html
PHP 7 is faster than PHP 5 for various reasons, such as it being 64bit
instead of 32bit
WTF, only in your windows world which don't matter that much, everywhere
else x86_64 is normal for many years and each software
Excuse me! Some of the major clients who use my ERP application only use
Windows servers, so your claim that Windows does matter is completely
bogus.
how does that change the fact that your claim "such as it being 64bit
instead of 32bit" is nonsense when most of the benchamrks and production
servers out there are running PHP on x86_64 with 86_64 builds for a decade
now?
64bit builds of PHP 5 for Windows were all marked as experimental, therefore
not guaranteed to be as reliable as the 32bit versions. The "experimental"
tag was only removed for PHP 7.
and improvements made to the engine itself, such as the AST. I submit
that it would be smaller and faster if it did not have to carry around
so much dross. Adding something to the core language just to save a few
keystrokes for a small number of lazy developers falls into the
category of dross
you ignored that practicaly *every* PHP version before PHP/ was faster
*and* had new features compared to the previous one
Just think how much faster and easier to maintain it would be if all this
save-a-few-keystrokes dross had not been added in the first place.
again: unproven claim, but in your own world a hashtable probably is also
not O(1) or you are just not capable to optimize software at all but then
stop claim others aren't too
Everybody knows that carrying around code which is either rarely used or not
used at all is an overhead. That's what the 80-20 rule demonstrates.
--
Tony Marston
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
