Re: Run Time Cache RFC

On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 10:46 PM, Christopher Jones <christopher.jones@oracle.com> wrote: > > Thanks Dmitry - that's great. I second that, useful info for people with time issues like us :) > Also thanks to Stas for his reply. > > Chris > > Dmitry Stogov wrote: >> >> Hi Chris, >> >> I've added notes for extension maintainers. >> I hope they will answer all your questions. >> >> Thanks. Dmitry. >> >> Christopher Jones wrote: >>> >>> >>> Dmitry Stogov wrote: >>>  >>  > http://wiki.php.net/rfc/runtimecache >>>  >>  > >>>  >>  > The patch breaks binary and source compatibility but it's not >>> hard >>> to >>>  >>  > adopt extensions to use it. >>> >>>  >> >>>  >> Hi Dmitry, >>>  >> >>>  >> Can update the RFC to explain the breakage and >>>  > >>>  > It's clear from the patch. The same is explained in RFC in human >>>  > language, but it's not so exact :) >>> >>> The RFC should give enough explanation so (i) extension maintainers >>> can immediately identify if their extension is going to be affected >>> (ii) readers know where to look in the patch to get more details. >>> >>> If I understand what you implied later in your email, calls to >>> zend_hash_copy should be replaced with calls to >>> object_properties_init.  Is this always true?  Is this the only >>> extension requirement?  What happens if extensions don't do this - >>> will it break or be a performance loss? >>> >>> I must be looking at a different RFC because there's nothing I can see >>> that mentions any of these things. >>> >>> Chris >>> > > -- > Email: christopher.jones@oracle.com > Tel:  +1 650 506 8630 > Blog:  http://blogs.oracle.com/opal/ > Free PHP Book: http://tinyurl.com/ugpomhome > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > > -- Pierre @pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org