Mike, I would suggest you look at the totally bogus mindcraft benchmarks of linux/apache. Those were orders of magnitude more bogus than anything here, yet ended up being useful.
Further, many posters seem to confuse a discussion of PHP's performance with a dicusion of its quality as a language overall. That is a mistake. People need to realize that these benchmarks test one narrow aspect of PHP, and are not a ranking of its quality as a language. There is an important difference there. "Mike Robinson": > The benchmark code is pre-alpha and incomplete as the author > states expressly. 'Useful' does not imply reliable, factual, or > scientific. In my view, what I've seen and read is neither useful, > nor harbours any of the other qualities, mentioned above, that > reasonable people might consider important. IMHO, the benchmarks > are bogus from the get go, and this discussion is moot."the benchmarks are bogus from the get go, and this discussion is moot." I have yet to see anything approching the care and completness of this guys benchmarks, pre-alpha and bogus or not with respect to PHP vis a vis other languages. In contrast to plenty of others they are open about their flaws, fully describe methadology and allow others to repeat them. Frankly, they seem to do a good job of testing what they set out to test, nested loops, array indexing and so on. aka they are as "reliable, factual, and scientific" as anything else I have seen put out. The open source community loves to critize, but I see few of these theoretical "real world" benchmarks floating around. I'm frankly surprised at some of the strong reactions to these benchmarks... think I'm going to get back to work :) - August -- 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]
