Re: apd change [rfc]
| From: | George Schlossnagle | Date: | Sat, 31 Aug 2002 02:17:01 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: apd change [rfc] | ||
| References: | 1 | Groups: | php.pear.dev |
| Request: | Send a blank email to pear-dev+get-8767@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
On Friday, August 30, 2002, at 10:14 PM, Alan Knowles wrote:
George Schlossnagle wrote:I think alot of this can be improved by removing overhead of some of the set_session_trace stuff. Ultimately, calling times() around your code is gonna be expensive, but alot of that can be trimmed.I'm seriously considering deprecating the apd_set_session_trace() functionality for the apd_set_pprof_trace() functionality, which is (imho) faster and more flexible. I'm interested in hearing any dissenting views though, before I actually remove the session_trace stuff.Yeah - the profiler works quite well, although the profiler options -W -w etc. are a bit confusing, it took me a while to work out how to get a meaningfull result out of it. It also seems to add a 3x speed decrease to runnning programs??
I think just providing file::line or something to the interactive debugger should be sufficient so alot of the callback stuff for session_trace could just be trimmed down., there are a few apd_* functions I added in for the interactive debugging that are really dupes of exising php or existing functions, which should be removed as well.. - became very clear when I wrote the manual..and with Thies' callback stuff in 4.2.3, the apd_callback is really superfluous.
regards alan// Principal ConsultantGeorge // George Schlossnagle
// OmniTI, Inc http://www.omniti.com// (c) 240.460.5234 (e) george@omniti.com // 1024D/1100A5A0 1370 F70A 9365 96C9 2F5E 56C2 B2B9 262F 1100 A5A0