Am 25.02.2013, 20:03 Uhr, schrieb Terry Ellison :
On 03/02/13 15:27, Hans-Juergen Petrich
wrote:
In this
example (using php-5.4.11 on Linux) the memory will grow non-stop:
for ( $fp = fopen('/dev/urandom', 'rb'); true;) {
eval ('$ano_fnc = func
On 03/02/13 15:27, Hans-Juergen Petrich wrote:
In this example (using php-5.4.11 on Linux) the memory will grow
non-stop:
for ( $fp = fopen('/dev/urandom', 'rb'); true;) {
eval ('$ano_fnc = function() {$x = "'.bin2hex(fread($fp,
mt_rand(1, 1))).'";};');
echo "Mem usage: ".memory_g
Am 05.02.2013, 20:53 Uhr, schrieb Terry Ellison :
On 04/02/13 10:57, Ángel González
wrote:
The memory will stop growing (on my machine) at ~2491584 bytes and the
loop is able to run forever,
creating each eval() furthermore uniqe ano-function's but not
endless-filling Zend-inter
On 04/02/13 10:57, Ángel González wrote:
The memory will stop growing (on my machine) at ~2491584 bytes and the
loop is able to run forever,
creating each eval() furthermore uniqe ano-function's but not
endless-filling Zend-internal tables.
but this still leaves the function record itself in t
Am 04.02.2013, 17:57 Uhr, schrieb "Ángel González" :
Hans-Jürgen Petrich wrote:
Hi Terry and all
thank you very much for your response.
The only thing that confused me about what you say that the second
*doesn't* grow
Yes, about that i was [and am still :-)] also confused... why the 2nd
one
Am 04.02.2013, 19:11 Uhr, schrieb Terry Ellison :
Hi Terry and all
thank you very much for your response.
The only thing that confused me about what you say that the second
*doesn't* grow
Yes, about that i was [and am still :-)] also confused... why the 2nd
one won't grow *non-stop*
so I ch
Hi Terry and all
thank you very much for your response.
The only thing that confused me about what you say that the second
*doesn't* grow
Yes, about that i was [and am still :-)] also confused... why the 2nd
one won't grow *non-stop*
so I checked and it does -- just the same as the first.
R
Hans-Jürgen Petrich wrote:
> Hi Terry and all
> thank you very much for your response.
>
>> The only thing that confused me about what you say that the second
>> *doesn't* grow
> Yes, about that i was [and am still :-)] also confused... why the 2nd
> one won't grow *non-stop*
>
>> so I checked and
Hello
Then again, your code still does not make sense to me ...
Fully understand :-)
Not want wasting your time with my specific situation... but there are
situation where it make sense :-)
For example... in my situation, i have time intensive (mathematically)
operations to do in pure p
Hi Terry and all
thank you very much for your response.
The only thing that confused me about what you say that the second *doesn't*
grow
Yes, about that i was [and am still :-)] also confused... why the 2nd one won't
grow *non-stop*
so I checked and it does -- just the same as the first.
2013/2/3 Sebastian Bergmann
> Am 03.02.2013 18:07, schrieb Sebastian Bergmann:
> > Can you explain why you are using eval() instead of a real anonymous
> > function? Thanks!
>
> Please ignore my email; I mixed up create_function() and eval(). Then
> again, your code still does not make sense to
Am 03.02.2013 18:07, schrieb Sebastian Bergmann:
> Can you explain why you are using eval() instead of a real anonymous
> function? Thanks!
Please ignore my email; I mixed up create_function() and eval(). Then
again, your code still does not make sense to me ...
--
Sebastian Bergmann
Am 03.02.2013 16:27, schrieb Hans-Juergen Petrich:
> Is there one who can explain this?
Can you explain why you are using eval() instead of a real anonymous
function? Thanks!
--
Sebastian BergmannCo-Founder and Principal Consultant
http://sebastian-bergmann.de/
On 03/02/13 16:27, Hans-Juergen Petrich wrote:
> The only different in the second example is the fixed body length of
> the eval()-created anoymous function.
> I wondering why the memory in the second code-example will be freed at
> some point while in the first example not.
>
> I don't think it's
14 matches
Mail list logo
