Re: [nyphp-talk] Include vs Include_once

2007-12-01 Thread Daniel Convissor
Hi John: On Fri, Nov 30, 2007 at 08:51:57PM -0800, John Zabroski wrote: > > How do you address the fact __autoload magic method is > part of the global namespace and that when two blocks > of code with the same signature are loaded on demand, > the function closest to the top of the stack is > se

Re: [nyphp-talk] Include vs Include_once

2007-11-30 Thread John Zabroski
--- Daniel Convissor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi John: > > On Fri, Nov 30, 2007 at 12:13:14AM -0500, John > Campbell wrote: > > > > What is > > the better programming logic, that doesn't just > duplicate the > > behavior? I want code that is correct, explicit, fast, and in that order. >

Re: [nyphp-talk] Include vs Include_once

2007-11-30 Thread Daniel Convissor
Hi John: On Fri, Nov 30, 2007 at 12:13:14AM -0500, John Campbell wrote: > > That is news to me. Why is include_once a performance drag? As Rob mentioned, include_once makes the PHP perform stat calls on the file system to make sure the file you want to include has not been done already. Rasm

Re: [nyphp-talk] Include vs Include_once

2007-11-29 Thread Rob Marscher
On Nov 30, 2007, at 12:13 AM, John Campbell wrote: include_once is a real performance drag. You should use better program logic to make it possible to use a regular include call. That is news to me. Why is include_once a performance drag? This is a pretty controversial topic. The theory

Re: [nyphp-talk] Include vs Include_once

2007-11-29 Thread John Campbell
> include_once is a real performance drag. You should use better program > logic to make it possible to use a regular include call. That is news to me. Why is include_once a performance drag? What is the better programming logic, that doesn't just duplicate the behavior? I have always just use

Re: [nyphp-talk] Include vs Include_once

2007-11-29 Thread Daniel Convissor
Urb: On Thu, Nov 29, 2007 at 08:19:02AM -0500, Urb LeJeune wrote: > include_once() files are in the same directory as the application > but blows up if they files are not in the same directory but are > in /usr/local/include. What exactly happens when it "blows up?" Are your includes silenced by

Re: [nyphp-talk] Include vs Include_once

2007-11-29 Thread Dan Cech
Urb LeJeune wrote: > My php.ini configuration is set to look for an include in the > currently accessed directory and then in /usr/local/include. A > contractor just delivered a program that works just fine if the > include_once() files are in the same directory as the application > but blows u

[nyphp-talk] Include vs Include_once

2007-11-29 Thread Urb LeJeune
My php.ini configuration is set to look for an include in the currently accessed directory and then in /usr/local/include. A contractor just delivered a program that works just fine if the include_once() files are in the same directory as the application but blows up if they files are not