Re: SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase
| From: | Ivan Enderlin @ Hoa | Date: | Wed, 09 Nov 2011 13:40:30 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: SplClassLoader RFC Voting phase | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-56189@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
On 08/11/11 18:39, Nikita Popov wrote:
On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 6:28 PM, guilhermeblanco@gmail.com <guilhermeblanco@gmail.com> wrote:I'm just proposing a new resource but not taking a position (I didn't vote yet). Best regards. -- Ivan Enderlin Developer of Hoa http://hoa.42/ or http://hoa-project.net/ PhD. student at LIFC/DISC (Vesontio) and INRIA (Cassis) http://lifc.univ-fcomte.fr/ and http://www.inria.fr/ Member of HTML and WebApps Working Group of W3C http://w3.org/Because there's no need to bring to C a single foreach. Also, if you re-read the RFC, you'll see that SplClassLoader is extendable for personalized developer needs, such as an addAll or an APC lookup.After your changes the RFC looks much more decent. I am still opposed to the idea of this going into core (mainly because there is no necessity), but now the implementation is somewhat more useful. A necessity is the speed. Metagoto was cited in the RFC but its benchmark was not cited. Here is it: <http://blog.runpac.com/post/splclassloader-php-extension-benchmarks>. It's interesting (/ping guilhermeblanco, please can you add this to the RFC?)