Re: Why is mktime(0,0,0,0,0,0) E_STRICT?

From:	Richard Quadling	Date:	Mon, 23 Oct 2006 10:35:03 +0000
Subject:	Re: Why is mktime(0,0,0,0,0,0) E_STRICT?
References:	1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8	Groups:	php.internals
Request:	Send a blank email to internals+get-26177@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message

On 23/10/06, Derick Rethans <derick@php.net> wrote:

On Mon, 23 Oct 2006, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
Yes, I see no point in pushing this responsibility into the userland, especially since its a BC break appearently.
There is no BC break:
I meant, there would be a BC break if this feature gets dropped, which is the point of the message, right? Yeah, but there is no point in calling mktime() without arguments as you can use time() doing the same. It's just a friendly hint that you're wasting CPU cycles. It's an E_STRICT message for ****s sake.

In a simple test, 100000 calls to time() took 0.055 seconds and mktime() took 3.2 seconds. Nearly 60 times faster to use time(). Didn't realise that. -- ----- Richard Quadling Zend Certified Engineer : http://zend.com/zce.php?c=ZEND002498&r=213474731 "Standing on the shoulders of some very clever giants!"