> > I stand by my comment that this has *some* of the same problems as a > > separate "build" script, such as the need to be configured correctly, > > I find repeating of this as overstating the concern simply because any > programming language feature would need to be used correctly. So this also > feels like a distinction without a difference. > > > the difficulty of debugging errors in this special code, > > Depends? If this where to use XDEBUG just like regular PHP there would be > zero difference. > > > and the need to invoke the extra processing manually for things like > > command-line scripts. > > Since PHP is different from a pre-compiled language like C or Go, it compiles > "on-demand." So I would see zero need for a build step. > > I would also see PHP could first run the compile-time code once, and then run > the runtime code for every execution. On-demand. And XDEBUG could be used for > both. > > For CLI, it might always run the runtime code and then the compile time code. > Unless there is a standard location set of compiled opcode in .ini file, > and/or unless PHP provided ways to generate OpCode artifacts to be loaded at > runtime. > > -Mike > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php >
There would be no definite build step in the sense of needing to run a compiler, as this 'compile time code' would run once during preloading on web code, and as sugested above, could be ran every time for command line scripts, but cacheing the opcodes in a file and automatically detecting changes and recompiling this as python does, could be a worthwhile optimisation. -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
