Hello,
Sorry for the late answer, but I was on vacations and without internet
access.
Thanks for the support Marcus. Marking functions as static also reduces code
size. When building PHP with -fPIC the decrease in size is really
noticeable. constifying allows the OS to share memory pages between
proccesses, reducing the overall memory usage.
btw, I have a couple of patches (that play with the compilers) waiting for
someone from the Zend Engine team to review. Can someone please take a look
at them?
For example, http://mega.ist.utl.pt/~ncpl/php_gcc4_visibility.txt reduces
the dso size when used with gcc 4.
I also like this one: http://mega.ist.utl.pt/~ncpl/zend_arginfo_const.txt
plus the huge one: http://mega.ist.utl.pt/~ncpl/Zend_2nd_constify_patch.txt
Nuno
P.S.: I would like to keep messing with compiler options, as compilers are
one of my passions :)
- Original Message -
Hello Andi,
one thing it helps in is that having it as non static makes some
compilers
use an additional jump. Actually for shared dlls those functions might end
up in the jump table that is going to be initialized during loading
process.
So infact there might be some advantage in doing it this way. Also
constifying is one of our overall goals since long. And here we finally
have
someone willing to do the job, why not letting him do it?
best regards
marcus
Saturday, August 26, 2006, 1:19:01 PM, you wrote:
I don't think it helps. It won't inline these functions in most cases
anyway, and having or not having a symbol shouldn't make a difference.
I'd prefer to stick to our standards and keep all extensions the same.
Who
knows if/when we'll want to play around with the symbols also. It could
come
in handly with dlls.
Andi
-Original Message-
From: Ilia Alshanetsky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Ilia Alshanetsky
Sent: Saturday, August 26, 2006 9:59 AM
To: Andi Gutmans
Cc: 'Nuno Lopes'; php-cvs@lists.php.net
Subject: Re: [PHP-CVS] cvs: php-src(PHP_5_2) /ext/bz2 bz2.c
php_bz2.h /ext/ctype ctype.c php_ctype.h /ext/json json.c
php_json.h /ext/pspell php_pspell.h pspell.c /ext/tidy
php_tidy.h tidy.c /ext/zlib php_zlib.h zlib.c zlib_fopen_wrapper.c
Andi,
I think the idea here was to minimize memory utilization and
allow the compiler to optimize the code better, something
that having functions defined as statics appears to help with.
On 26-Aug-06, at 11:30 AM, Andi Gutmans wrote:
Why is this important? We never defined these as static. As long as
you move them to the .c file (for whatever reason you have
that might
be
justified)
you really don't have to define them as static IMO.
Ilia Alshanetsky
Best regards,
Marcus
--
PHP CVS Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
