Re: tick callbacks,not concurrently?

At 03:29 PM 9/2/00 -0500, Andrei Zmievski wrote:

On Sat, 02 Sep 2000, André Langhorst wrote: I wasn´t unable to watch the forking process completely. Execute this script, it shows that a) sequential executing with for() equals tick executing, time-wise, I assume that this is not ok, well maybe I ran into the WTF thing and did not understand what´s going on, I thought these functions were executed concurrently, what is (apparently) not the case. Ok. they must be spawned sequentially, but even replacing usleep with sleep(1) keeps these proportions in time difference. b) referenced variable $b is only increased in every function in for(), that´s ok. That's right, the functions are _not_ executed concurrently - they are not threads.

We should make sure people know what they are used for. They were asked for by Stig because he wanted to be able to start opening http:// connections but continue some processing at the same time because opening a connection takes time. This still hasn't been implemented but it's one of the only real life examples ticks should be used. If it's not something special like this you're doing then don't use ticks. Andi --- Andi Gutmans <andi@zend.com> http://www.zend.com/