At 12:07 PM 7/9/2001 -0700, Brian Tanner wrote:
>Just want to pipe up and say I'm worried about a potential performance hit
>here. I'm building an enterprise web app that includes over 30 files on
>every request. Will changing the directory for the include file, and
>changing it back after create a significant performance hit? (I would think
>so).
I think that it will effect performance and therefore I wouldn't want to go
in the direction of chdir().
Andi
>Just to point out -- things might get a little more confusing here...
>because if people get to pretend that the file they are including is being
>executed in the directory where it is stored, they may have problems
>adjusting to the idea of making links and images (in HTML) relative to the
>script that called their file, and they might have to end up re-implementing
>existing workarounds anyway. Just a thought.
>
>-Brian Tanner
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Zeev Suraski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>Sent: July 9, 2001 5:48 AM
>To: Andi Gutmans
>Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Possible feature for current version of PHP or
>PHP 4.1/5.0.
>
>
>Yeah, this has been requested several times.
>I think that changing the cwd to the directory of an included file makes
>good sense. It is, indeed, downwards incompatible and may break existing
>applications. We have 4 options:
>
>1. Do nothing
>2. Make include() and friends change directory to the directory of the
>file they include. This makes the most sense, but may break existing apps.
>3. #2, only make it optional
>4. Add the directory of the included file to the include_path when the
>included file is being executed. It can get a bit nasty with nested
>includes, even though I think it should work. It's also a bit tricky to
>implement, as the engine doesn't know about include_path (at least right
>now).
>
>I'm leaning towards #3, even though I don't like the
>yet-another-runtime-option. It may be justified if we say we're phasing
>out the old functionality in PHP 5.0.
>
>Zeev
>
>At 18:14 8/7/2001, Andi Gutmans wrote:
> >Hey,
> >
> >I think one thing that bothers PHP developers is when they do:
> >include "../foo.inc";
> >and in foo.inc they do:
> >include "bar.inc";
> >
> >That bar.inc is not searched for in foo.inc's current directory
> >automatically. As we pretty much always have the expanded filename of the
> >current executing script I thought it would be nice to add that if bar.inc
> >is not found in the include_path to take the full path of foo.inc (i.e.
> >/path/to/foo_inc/foo.inc) and try opening /path/to/foo_inc/bar.inc.
> >
> >What do you guys think?
> >
> >Andi
> >
> >--
> >PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/>
> >To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>--
>Zeev Suraski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>CTO & co-founder, Zend Technologies Ltd. http://www.zend.com/
>
>
>--
>PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/>
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
>
>--
>PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/>
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/>
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
