Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
Can we get this patch to release quality by this weekend? So that people can test it on Monday/Tuesday ahead of RC1?
I don't see this being a problem, I do have a few items I'd like to point out for feedback/suggestions: 1) Currently it doesn't support method level lazy loading, it's probably advisable to wait and include this later, but if everyone thinks it's significant enough we could probably add support for that. I'm not sure on all the details this involves, perhaps someone familiar with method calls could suggest difficulty and/or optimized ways to do the lookups. 2) Currently I've inserted these hook calls into everywhere we call/lookup classes. This has the downside that any extension wanting to mess with the function table, lookup entries, etc will need to be aware of the callback hooks. I think a better architecture is to create an API for function table and class table operations. Perhaps this could be done later if we want this likely more stable version in 5.3, and perhaps I'm overstating the significance of other functions doing these sort of things and not being aware of this new feature. (I believe dmitry mentions several extenions that need changes to support this). On the upside not creating an API means existing code will still work if they don't use lazy loading. ;-) 3) The largest portion of time currently is simply adding dummy entries to the lazy hash tables so we can detect name collisions and availability, my next goal is to improve the performance of this by either creating a faster copy of the entries or determine some better method of performing lookups/marking functions as available (something like lookups directly into the APC shared memory segment). Just putting this out there in case anyone has some interesting suggestions. I think all the above 3 items don't necessarily need to be done to have this work in 5.3 (and #3 is pretty much APC/opcode cache centric) and might cause unecessary complication for an initial support of this, but what does everyone else think? Regarding a couple of Dmitry's suggestions:
1) I would prefer to add additional hash_value argument into lookup_function_hook() and lookup_class_hook to prevent multiple calculation.
I'm upset I didn't do that in the first place ;-)
2) function_exists() should use lookup_function_hook(). 3) interface_exists() and class_alias() should use lookup_class_hook().
I'm pretty sure I already have support for this, it may have been lost while porting it over, I'll double check. I'll follow up with Dmitry on getting these and any other items taken care of, thanks! -shire -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
