On 24 Mar 2010, at 10:46, Rene Veerman wrote: > On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 11:58 AM, Stuart Dallas <stut...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On 24 Mar 2010, at 09:36, Rene Veerman wrote: >> >>> unless the actual php development team would like to weigh in on this >>> matter of course. >>> >>> yes, i do consider it that important. >>> >>> these nay-sayers usually also lobby the dev-team to such extent that >>> these features would actually not make it into php. >> >> Frankly I don't give a crap whether threading is supported in PHP, it does >> everything I need it to do. If I need threading I use a language that >> supports it, like Python or C++. > > good, so we'll put you down as a "neutral"... despite what follows;
I'm not neutral, I just ultimately don't care either way. I'll deal with whatever happens rather than trying to control everything. >> I love the way you call us nay-sayers like it's supposed to be an insult. I >> follow the KISS principle to the nth, and as such threading in PHP doesn't >> make a lot of sense to me. I'm yet to come across a problem I couldn't solve >> with pure PHP, but when the need arises I have no issue mixing in a little >> C++, Python, Ruby, or whatever, to meet my performance and scalability >> goals. I go to the mountain, I don't sit there complaining that the mountain >> ain't moving in my direction! > > your metaphor is funny but inaccurate. therefore invalid. You say it's inaccurate, therefore invalid, but offer no argument as to why. You want the tools to change to fit the way you want to work, rather than adapting to the tools you have available. I stand by my metaphor, both the humour and the message. >> My opinion, and that of most others who've weighed in, is that you're almost >> certainly looking at the problem from the wrong angle. What you haven't done >> is explicitly explain why you want threading to be supported. Give us a real >> example of why you think it should be supported and I guarantee we can come >> up with a way to get you what you want without requiring massive changes to >> the core of your chosen tool. And if we can't then you may actually convince >> us that threading would be a valuable feature to have available. > > > no sorry i don't have to. all i'll say is: realtime systems with real Indeed you don't have to, I never said you did. > work to do, are often better implemented with a non-sql solution that > can use threading and shared memory support. period. I completely agree, but I wouldn't go near PHP for a realtime system in a million years. It's the wrong tool for the job. > it's so blatantly obvious that i don't feel like i have to spell out a > complete example, which YOU can then say: "ah, but there's different > ways of doing that!". > STOP TRYING TO DETERMINE MY HABITS AND CHOICE OF TOOLS. I'm not. You seem to think we all care whether you use PHP or not. I don't, and I'm pretty sure nobody else does either. I'm not trying to tell you what to use, I'm simply pointing out that you appear to be fixed on PHP for some reason and I don't understand why. It makes no sense to me, but frankly I don't care. >> You mentioned Facebook as an example of a popular application. Are you aware >> that they only recently started using their compiler in production, and that >> prior to that they were happily running PHP to serve their front end without >> ever complaining that it didn't support threading? Even now, with hip-hop, >> individual requests are served in a single thread, so the language itself >> still doesn't support threading, and I don't hear them complaining that it's >> costing them a fortune. Why? Because it's not. And if it was they would have >> added it by now. > > yea, they didn't complain, they had the cash income to build the > hip-hop compiler. > i thank 'm for it. Way to skip over my point. Facebook is pretty much guaranteed to be a bigger site in terms of data size and concurrent users than anything you or I are ever going to be involved in, and yet they don't think threading in PHP is important. That was my point. >> One final thing... if threading is this important to you, then I'm sure >> there are a number of developers who would happily add it in a fork of the >> core for suitable compensation. Once implemented it's possible the internals >> team would accept it for addition to the official version. If you really >> believe it has the potential to save you a butt-load of cash, the economics >> of paying for it should stack up. > > I dont feel i need to pay for a programming language keeping up with the > times. > Then i'll indeed find another language to use. I find it curious and amusing that you think the lack of threading support means PHP is somehow living in the dark ages. But yeah, complaining that the FREE tool you've CHOSEN to use doesn't support the feature YOU want... yeah, that's the way to go. -Stuart -- http://stut.net/ -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
