Re: Re: Any idea why we have two html_puts()'s?

At 18:24 12/05/2002, Sascha Schumann wrote:

    - it is buffering as you already noted without having to rely
      on the huge output-buffering infrastructure.  I have not
      benchmarked it, but I do assume that it is noticably slower
      than php_html_puts.

    - it is faster due to passing TSRMLS around, instead of
      having to fetch it for *every* single examined byte.  This
      is especially significant in threaded environments such as
      Apache 2 or ISAPI.

I'm trying to understand why you care so much about its performance..? There are cases where duplicating code for performance reasons makes sense, but I don't see how this function falls into that category. Either way, enabling output buffering for it should definitely do the trick, even if it's a couple of percent slower than the specialized implementation. Are you using it in some module? Because the only code to currently make use of it is phpinfo(), and it isn't noticeably slow even in the current byte-by-byte method... Zeev