Oh I see. Yes, this is one of the reasons I don't like the "pure can't include non-pure" idea.
Another reason: you can't write generic algorithms. PHP 5.4 has much improved support for anonymous functions, so we should see an increase in libraries that take a few functions as parameters and carry out an operation via those functions. But what if one of those functions requires something from a .php file? Whoops, I guess it's not a generic sorting algorithm library I just released, it's a "generic sorting as long as none of your functions touch a .php file" algorithm library. And good luck figuring this out when it happens. Kris has pointed out that you could still load a .php file via a function that was defined earlier in a .php file that later includes .phpp. But this just means that, like my RFC, his RFC contains a compromise about strictness. It's just that his compromise is more confusing and less likely to be understood before the user gets frustrated and declares the whole thing not worth messing with. I think ".phpp files don't contain <?php and ?> but can require and include files that do" is a much clearer compromise, one that will get us what we want (an ever increasing percentage of .phpp files) without making enemies and generating opposition along the way to that better place. On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 9:24 AM, Arvids Godjuks <arvids.godj...@gmail.com> wrote: > 16 апреля 2012 г. 16:09 пользователь Tom Boutell <t...@punkave.com> написал: > >> These tools already strip <?php tags, they would need minimal changes to >> support rolling in a .phpp file unmodified. Unless I am missing something? >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> On Apr 15, 2012, at 5:30 PM, Arvids Godjuks <arvids.godj...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> > I posted the bellow text in other thread, but i should have it post >> > here, >> > so i'm reposting it to this thread. >> > >> > Well, it's time for me to remind about the techique many use (and some >> > frameworks provide it out of the box) - the application file >> > concatination >> > to speed up file loading. >> > Yii framework provides a Yiilite.php file for this, that includes mostly >> > used core classes in one big file.that loads much faster and is used for >> > production. Any other framework has user extentions or other type of >> > solutions for this to speed up the application, and it makes really big >> > difference. >> > So there is a good question - how the hell in a MVC framework would i >> > combine my models, controllers, components and other stuff that will >> > definetly be as in .php so in .pphp. And not every file will be cached >> > like >> > that - some will remain as distinct files even in production. >> > >> > The further discussion goes the more questions there is and less answers >> > there are. > > > Yes they obviously do, but that's not what I'm concerned about. > What I'm concerned is that code from .php and .pphp files get's mixed in > together - template engine related stuff is used as much, as do controllers, > session handling classes and bunch of other stuff that by definition is > .pphp stuff, but the template stuff is .php and it includes templates. So > basically everything just has to fall back to the embedded PHP mode to work > and we have no gain from the proposal what so ever - it just becomes > useless. > > That's not counting other issues that people and I have been voicing and to > be honest, I never saw a reply to any of it. Maybe there is a reply to > all those questions, but they are under wall of text that usually goes in > reply - that just discourages to read it at all. -- Tom Boutell P'unk Avenue 215 755 1330 punkave.com window.punkave.com -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
