On 10/10/05, Richard Lynch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > In addition to the Good column, let me add this: > > Once I made all my .html files go through PHP, I found myself adding a > lot of cool little snippets to my files that I wouldn't have bothered > with if I had to re-name the file, fix all the links, worry about > search engines "losing" my page, etc. > > I would encourage anybody but the most hard-core million-hits-per-day > super-stressed folks to just go ahead and use PHP on .htm and .html
Except its terrible form and not at all portable. If 5% to 10% is putting you over the edge on performance, you're > already in trouble anyway. > > NOTE: > 5% to 10% was a lonnnnnnng time ago. I'd love to see more current > benchmarks or, better, real-live stats from a moderately busy/complex > server. I highly doubt that many people use this configuration so there really hasn't been any need for a new benchmark. -Mike -- ________________________________ Michael E. Crute Software Developer SoftGroup Development Corporation Linux, because reboots are for installing hardware. "In a world without walls and fences, who needs windows and gates?"
