2007/12/2, tedd [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Oh yes, it's very much like fractals, but the term fractalism is
usually reserved for art forms based on fractals.
However, one could conclude that all crystalline forms are a
real-world examples of fractals. In similar vein, all repetitive
processes
At 8:56 AM +0100 11/29/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Looks for me a bit like a philosophical question, but maybe you have
something to say about it nevertheless. A good thing for me would be
something like: up to 125 lines of code you get an adequate performance with
simply parsing it every time,
2007/12/2, tedd [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
To me, good structure starts at the function level. Like the lattice
of a crystal, coding grows and reflects the most basic element. Keep
that element consistent and you'll find that it will be reflected in
everything you do.
How's that for philosophical?
At 8:56 PM -0300 12/2/07, Martin Alterisio wrote:
2007/12/2, tedd mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED]:
To me, good structure starts at the function level. Like the lattice
of a crystal, coding grows and reflects the most basic element. Keep
that element consistent and you'll find that it
I got different portions of code only used for certain purposes (who don't
;-)?). But what, in your opinion (better: in your experience) would be the
best regarding script-performance: Putting each code-portion in a separate
file and include it if required, putting it in a constant-dependent
On Thu, 2007-11-29 at 08:56 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I got different portions of code only used for certain purposes (who don't
;-)?). But what, in your opinion (better: in your experience) would be the
best regarding script-performance: Putting each code-portion in a separate
file
I got different portions of code only used for certain purposes (who
don't
;-)?). But what, in your opinion (better: in your experience) would be
the
best regarding script-performance: Putting each code-portion in a
separate
file and include it if required, putting it in a
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I got different portions of code only used for certain purposes (who don't
;-)?). But what, in your opinion (better: in your experience) would be the
best regarding script-performance: Putting each code-portion in a separate
file and include it if required, putting it
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I got different portions of code only used for certain purposes (who don't
;-)?). But what, in your opinion (better: in your experience) would be the
best regarding script-performance: Putting each code-portion in a separate
file and include it if required, putting
Tomi Kaistila wrote:
...
You can avoid duplication by only using require_once or include_once. PHP
indeed require_once() and include_once() help with maintainability but it
should be mentioned that if you are going to use an op-code cache (as Rob
Cummings mentioned also) then it is highly
Jochem Maas wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I got different portions of code only used for certain purposes (who don't
;-)?). But what, in your opinion (better: in your experience) would be the
best regarding script-performance: Putting each code-portion in a separate
file and include it if
Stut wrote:
Jochem Maas wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I got different portions of code only used for certain purposes (who
don't ;-)?). But what, in your opinion (better: in your experience)
would be the best regarding script-performance: Putting each
code-portion in a separate file and
Jo chem baas wrote:
Stut wrote:
Jochem Maas wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I got different portions of code only used for certain purposes (who
don't ;-)?). But what, in your opinion (better: in your experience)
would be the best regarding script-performance: Putting each
code-portion in a
Stut wrote:
Jo chem baas wrote:
Stut wrote:
Jochem Maas wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I got different portions of code only used for certain purposes (who
don't ;-)?). But what, in your opinion (better: in your experience)
would be the best regarding script-performance: Putting each
Jochem Maas wrote:
Stut wrote:
Jo chem baas wrote:
Stut wrote:
Jochem Maas wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I got different portions of code only used for certain purposes (who
don't ;-)?). But what, in your opinion (better: in your experience)
would be the best regarding script-performance:
On Thu, 2007-11-29 at 13:51 +0100, Jochem Maas wrote:
okay, but I was just paraphrasing the man Rasmus, although I admit I
may
have misinterpreted (or misundersstood the 'why') - thought I pretty
sure
he has written on a number of occasions that code like the following
sucks
for op-code
Stut wrote:
Jochem Maas wrote:
Stut wrote:
Jo chem baas wrote:
^- wtf happened here? :-) it's quite funny if you know dutch :-)
...
Whether there is conditional definition or not, the opcode cache will
look the same. The reason for this is that function and class
definitions
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just to be curious:
when something like
if (defined('FOO') FOO) {
class foo{};
function foo(){};
}
is parsed and FOO is not defined, will the code inside be parsed
nevertheless? Or is anything inside skipped, leading to a (fragments of
microseconds)
Jochem Maas wrote:
Stut wrote:
Jochem Maas wrote:
Stut wrote:
Jo chem baas wrote:
^- wtf happened here? :-) it's quite funny if you know dutch :-)
Pass. Looking back it looks like it happened one of the times I replied.
Didn't do it on purpose, honest! ;)
Whether there is
Just to be curious:
when something like
if (defined('FOO') FOO) {
class foo{};
function foo(){};
}
is parsed and FOO is not defined, will the code inside be parsed
nevertheless? Or is anything inside skipped, leading to a (fragments of
microseconds) faster handling of the code? Thus to
they have a word very suitable to this situation in dutch 'mierenneuken',
personally I'd stick with pretty girls.
OT: Couldn't translate that in german, the nearest approach seems to be
Haarspalterei but unfortunately for me this seems not to match the
situation. And it doesn't meet pretty
On Thu, 29 Nov 2007 14:54:43 +0100, Jochem Maas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just to be curious:
when something like
if (defined('FOO') FOO) {
class foo{};
function foo(){};
}
is parsed and FOO is not defined, will the code inside be parsed
nevertheless? Or is
On Thursday 29 November 2007, Jochem Maas wrote:
okay, but I was just paraphrasing the man Rasmus, although I admit I may
have misinterpreted (or misundersstood the 'why') - thought I pretty sure
he has written on a number of occasions that code like the following sucks
for op-code caches and
On Thu, 2007-11-29 at 12:13 +, Stut wrote:
Not ;). There is no such thing as a compile-time definition in PHP.
There certainly is...
?php
if( !function_exists( 'file_put_contents' ) )
{
$def = _
function file_put_contents
( \$filename, \$data,
On Thu, 2007-11-29 at 16:49 +, Stut wrote:
Robert Cummings wrote:
On Thu, 2007-11-29 at 12:13 +, Stut wrote:
Not ;). There is no such thing as a compile-time definition in PHP.
There certainly is...
?php
if( !function_exists( 'file_put_contents' ) )
{
$def = _
Robert Cummings wrote:
On Thu, 2007-11-29 at 12:13 +, Stut wrote:
Not ;). There is no such thing as a compile-time definition in PHP.
There certainly is...
?php
if( !function_exists( 'file_put_contents' ) )
{
$def = _
function file_put_contents
(
26 matches
Mail list logo
