On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 9:25 AM, Tony Marston <t...@marston-home.demon.co.uk
> wrote:

> "Eddie Drapkin" <oorza...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:68de37340905280801m6964d355l2d6d8ef773f3b...@mail.gmail.com...
> > There's a huge difference between laziness and opting in to use an
> > incredibly useful (and easy to properly deploy) feature to save myself
> > time
> > so that I can spend more time writing that structured and efficient code
> > of
> > which you speak.  And the problem with what you're saying is that you
> > still
> > have to include 'singleton.php' somewhere in order to call its static
> > methods,
> I have a single general purpose include file which autmatically includes
> all
> other standard files, so I never have to explicity load my singleton class.
> > and I'd rather just spend 30 minutes writing an autoloader object
> > and letting it deal with finding any of the classes I use then trying to
> > keep track of legacy code I didn't write and require'ing them all over
> the
> > place.
> I'd rather not waste 30 minutes of my time writing a feature that I don't
> need.
> The difference between using and not using the autoload feature does not
> have any measurable impact on either my development times, nor the
> execution
> of my code, so I choose to not use it. That's my choice, and I'm sticking
> to
> it.
> > The way I look at it, if you spend all your time handling things that you
> > could automate - and if written properly, will always work as expected
> > (it's
> > called unit testing and debugging) - then you have no time to write that
> > structured and efficient code in order to meet your deadlines! :)
> Not using autoload does not have any noticeable effect on my deadlines, so
> I
> have no incentive to use it. Just because you say that I *should* use it
> carries no weight at all.

this simple fact is that autoloading is something anyone can implement
themselves.  take a look at code igniters $this->load() arrangement.
basically they do dynamic loading rather than requires, and thats part of
the reason for the massive performance advantage it has over other

autoloading is nice because it affords a somewhat standard approach to a
common issue.  sure, you could do something like ci, but i say why bother,
why not just use __autoload() and freinds now that php offers it as a
feature.  then again, if you already have some dynamic loading system, of
course theres no real call to move to __autoload().  (and of course ci is
written w/ php4 support in mind, which obviously eliminates __autoload in
their scenario)

im also skeptical of the advantages dynamic loading offers in systems
running an opcode cache.  essentially after initially caching a scripts
opcodes, successive include/require calls are a hit to the cache to see its
already there.  im sure dynamic loading is offers dramatic performance gains
systems not running opcode caches though.


Reply via email to