On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 6:41 PM, David Rodrigues <david.pro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have take note that a lot of projects (like Laravel) prefer uses > method_exists() than implements an empty function (that should be useful to > IDE when it is not annotated as an @method on class). > > For some reason, method_exists() will works faster than direct call when > method doesn't exists vs. a direct method call when method is empty. > > My benchmarks: > > Case #1: > * Direct call, empty method: > * Cycles by min. : 26.459.804 > > Case #2: > * Direct call, simple content (eg. is_bool(true)): > * Cycles by min. : 24.771.454 > - 6.38% slower than Case #1 > > Case #3: > * method_exists(), no method: > * Cycles by min. : 45.014.690 > - 70.12% faster than Case #1 > > Case #4: > * method_exists(), method exists with simple content: > * Cycles by min. : 18.068.555 > - 27.06% slower than Case #2 > > You will note that method_exists() will be more useful when method doesn't > exists (+70% faster), but worse in cases where it does (27% slower). Which > make that a hard decision, because you need "guess" the method declaration > usage when implements something like that. If case the method existence is > very low, then you will prefer method_exists(), which is bad for code > design. > > My suggestion here (that I don't know if could be applied as is): identify > empty methods and avoiding the execution (once that it will not do anything > anyway). So we could just implement empty methods without any problem. > > Maybe it could be done at this point and related: > https://github.com/php/php-src/blob/master/Zend/zend_ > language_parser.y#L725 > > -- > David Rodrigues Could you please provide the used benchmarking code? Nikita
