Re: Support for keywords where possible

From: Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2013 12:56:42 +0000
Subject: Re: Support for keywords where possible
References: 1 2  Groups: php.internals 
Request: Send a blank email to [email protected] to get a copy of this message

Am 12.9.2013 um 09:10 schrieb Michael Wallner <[email protected]>:

> On 11 September 2013 23:21, Bob Weinand <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Hi!
>> 
>> I tried to widen the naming possibilities by allowing to use keywords as identifiers (for
>> function names, class names, label (goto) names, ....) where possible. It doesn't break any BC.
>> 
>> Furthermore when BC needs to be broken in future for new keywords, it will have a smaller
>> impact as most usages of the new keyword then still work.
> 
> I like the idea, but it looks like the patch defers many string
> comparisons from the parser to strcmps. Do you have performance
> comparisons of running e.g. a framework, which uses those keywords a
> lot?
> 
> -- 
> Regards,
> Mike


A little benchmark here: https://gist.github.com/bwoebi/6536824

Here I picked always the best from 10 times running.

With patch:
root# ./sapi/cli/php microbench.php 
Took for 10000 iterations: 8.6687519550323 seconds

Without patch:
root# ./sapi/cli/php ../bwo-php-src/microbench.php 
Took for 10000 iterations: 8.5741410255432 seconds

But this is the very worst case. (e.g. there are JUST cases where strncasecmp needs to be used)

When picking random files the results are pretty similar:

With patch:
root# ./sapi/cli/php microbench.php 
Took for 10000 iterations: 15.564201116562 seconds

Without patch:
root# ./sapi/cli/php microbench.php 
Took for 10000 iterations: 15.562065023422 seconds

It's here only a difference of about 2 milliseconds or 0,01% what is in the margin of error I
think.


Bob Weinand


Thread (40 messages)

« previous php.internals (#69094) next »