Re: A call for help (urgent)

>> >> That has nothing to do with the fact applying this patch is morally wrong, and also may or >> may not be true. > > Morally wrong? I don’t see how morals come into this. Yes, it would undo some work that has > been done by you, in favour of someone else’s work. But I don’t see what’s ‘wrong’ about > that. Between the list of names I wrote, you have 80-90% of the engine code if not more. The yes group is - for the most part - comprised of non engine contributors, which are forcing their will on the ones who are. I'm not saying these guys aren't PHP contributors, btw. But much like I wouldn't dream of telling the docs team how they should do their job, I don't expect the opposite to happen either. > I never said phpng was evil. I said it was developed behind closed doors. You suggested it was somehow inferior because of that, not just stating a fact. >> For the current PHP it yields an 8% memory increase. For phpng it'll be a lot more >> since it's data structures are more compact and therefore it'll be a lot more, relatively >> speaking. > > Relatively, yes. In absolute terms, however, what is the gap between vanilla and phpng + 64bit > patch? We don't have any numbers about phpng plus the patch because it doesn't yet exist. My guess is that it'll be in the 20-30% range to add this patch to phpng. Comparing to vanilla doesn't make sense at all - we didn't work phpng to waste the gains on this patch - but to improve performance. Zeev