Re: Re: Generators in PHP
| From: | Andrew Faulds | Date: | Fri, 27 Jul 2012 13:31:07 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Re: Generators in PHP | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-61840@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
On 27/07/12 13:23, Lester Caine wrote:
Nikita Popov wrote:Generators are being added because they make things easier. The function-with-yield model of writing iterators is much easier, faster, and far less verbose than manually creating a class and implementing the iterator interface. This is why they are being added. They also might be a bit faster than Iterator classes, I don't know. But the main point is they are a powerful feature that greatly simplifies creation of iterators. I will not discuss further on this point. -- Andrew Faulds http://ajf.me/In a different way ... Is the only thing that changes the 'function' into a 'generator'I'll ask again since no one has answered ...the call to process the data with 'yield'? ( That would bereplacingSQL procedure ) ... So how DOES an IDE work out the flow in order to correctly check that variables are defined? As always, my IDE provides a lot of 'sexy' stuff so that I don't'SUSPEND' in anhave it built in to the language, and I still can't see how a lotneed tobeing loaded in helps with performance which is the only thing thatof what isinterested in. Performance wise why is yield better than just directly calling a function to handle the data?I amLester Caine and Alex Aulbach, may I ask you to continue this discussion in a separate thread? I am really interested in constructive responses about the generator RFC, but your discussion is generating a lot of noise, which makes it very hard for me to pick out the few mails that are of interest to me. If you could open a new thread (like "Generator keyword") it would help a lot.Nikita - I am looking for a well reasoned argument as to why generator has to be added at all! 'Just because it can be' is not a valid argument, but perhaps you could add to the RFC the performance implication or advantage of what is being proposed. That would at least be some comparison with the current methods of doing the same thing? Argh. I am trying to avoid this completely ridiculous thread of discussion that has grown well beyond any reasonable length. But I should just say this.