Hi Bob,
Actually, our patches were orthogonal, resolving the same hack in different
ways.
Sorry, I had a lot of work, and missed your patch when you committed it.
Then I just wasn't able to merge them in reasonable time.
We will need to discuss it in more details and then reimplement on top of
phpng or revert in master.
The thing I don't like in the patch, that you converted every
IS_CONSTANT_ARRAY into IS_CONSTANT_AST.
With this approach all the constant arrays have to be evaluated at run-time..
However, I think about optimization when we won't copy constant arrays
(without symbolic constants) from shared memory at all.
I might be wrong, or misunderstand something in your patch, so we'll
definitely need to talk, but now I would prefer to close the known problems
first.
Let's speak on next week.
Thanks. Dmitry.
On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 11:08 PM, Bob Weinand <[email protected]> wrote:
> Am 5.5.2014 um 16:31 schrieb Dmitry Stogov <[email protected]>:
>
> I'm doing it right now: https://wiki.php.net/phpng-int
>
> Thanks. Dmitry.
>
>
> On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 6:30 PM, Andrea Faulds <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Hmm. This is unrelated, but while you’re busy refactoring PHP, could you
> comment and document the bits you refactor a bit more? More documentation
> can only be a good thing, and it’s something Zend is sorely lacking.
>
> --
> Andrea Faulds
> http://ajf.me/
>
>
> Nice work!
>
> Just wondering why
> http://git.php.net/?p=php-src.git;a=commitdiff;h=f614fc68984b2d7fce3f275b8106955b5d910472was
> reverted in phpng?
>
> Is there any real reason to still use IS_CONSTANT_ARRAY? The AST variant
> is much nicer, fixes a bug and removes the IS_CONSTANT_INDEX hack.
>
> Bob
>
>
>
>
>