Re: Re: [PHP] include

On 20 Nov 2011 at 23:46, Tamara Temple <tamouse.lists@tamaratemple.com> wrote: > Tim Streater <tim@clothears.org.uk> wrote: > >> At the moment I'm using an instance of apache to run PHP scripts, as >> and when required via AJAX. Having got some understanding of web >> sockets, I'm minded to look at having a small server to execute these >> functions as required. The scripts, some 50 or so, are only about >> 300kbytes of source code, which seems small enough that it could all >> be loaded with include, as in: > >> <?php >> $fn = 'wiggy.php'; >> include $fn; >> ?> >> >> This appears to work although I couldn't see it documented. > > I'm really not sure what you're looking for here -- that is pretty > standard php practice to load php files with include -- what were you > expecting here? I'm looking for confirmation that: include $fn; is an allowed form of the include statement. > While it's certainly possible to rig up something using sockets, I don't > think that's how AJAX works, and you'd need a JS library that did. Hmmm, I think perhaps I've not made myself clear - sorry about that. At present I'm using AJAX and apache; I'd like to *stop* doing that (and not use another web server, either). In my case, client and server are the same machine - the user's machine. There is a browser window and JavaScript within it which makes the AJAX requests. I just happen to use apache to have a variety of PHP scripts run to provide results back to the browser window. > Generally, you should only really need to dynamically replace parts of a > long-running program if you don't want to restart it. However, php > scripts are not long-running programs in general, unlike the apache > server itself, for example, and certainly if the php scripts are running > under apache, they will be time- and space-limited by whatever is set in > the php.ini file. If these little scripts are merely responding to AJAX > requests, they should be really short-lived. At present these scripts generally are short-lived, but with some notable exceptions. Hence my exploration of whether I could use websockets instead. -- Cheers -- Tim