At 11:06 AM +1100 12/24/08, Clancy wrote:
On Tue, 23 Dec 2008 10:25:13 -0500, tedd.sperl...@gmail.com (tedd) wrote:
>Two things:
1. One statement, one line.
2. The code between the two examples is different; produces different
results; and thus is rather pointless in making a definitive
>com
On Tue, 23 Dec 2008 10:25:13 -0500, tedd.sperl...@gmail.com (tedd) wrote:
>At 9:10 AM +1100 12/23/08, Clancy wrote:
>>Schlossnagle (in "Advanced PHP Programming") advises:
>>
>>$i = 0; while ($i < $j)
>> {
>>
>> ++$i;
>> }
>>
>>rather than:
>>
>>$i = 0; while ($i < $j)
At 9:10 AM +1100 12/23/08, Clancy wrote:
Schlossnagle (in "Advanced PHP Programming") advises:
$i = 0; while ($i < $j)
{
++$i;
}
rather than:
$i = 0; while ($i < $j)
{
...
$i++;
}
as the former apparently uses less m
On Mon, 22 Dec 2008 22:40:58 -0800, larstor...@gmail.com ("Lars Torben Wilson")
wrote:
>Well, in all fairness, it *is* faster--but you'll only notice the
>difference in extremely tight and long-running loops (try it ;) ). As
>long as you know why you're using it and what the side effects are, it
oops, yes of course lol
Tim-Hinnerk Heuer
http://www.ihostnz.com
On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 7:43 PM, Lars Torben Wilson wrote:
> 2008/12/22 German Geek :
> > agree, ++$i wont save u nething, it just means that the variable is
> > incremented after it is used:
>
> You meant ". . .before it is used:
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 11:43 PM, Lars Torben Wilson
wrote:
> 2008/12/22 German Geek :
> > agree, ++$i wont save u nething, it just means that the variable is
> > incremented after it is used:
>
> You meant ". . .before it is used:", right?
i hope so, coming from an individual who likes to optim
2008/12/22 German Geek :
> agree, ++$i wont save u nething, it just means that the variable is
> incremented after it is used:
You meant ". . .before it is used:", right?
Torben
> $i = 0;
> while ($i < 4) echo $i++;
>
> will output
> 0123
>
> while
>
> $i = 0;
> while ($i < 4) echo ++$i;
>
> wi
2008/12/22 Nathan Nobbe :
> On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 3:10 PM, Clancy wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 22 Dec 2008 10:20:09 +1100, dmag...@gmail.com (Chris) wrote:
>>
>> >I'd call this a micro-optimization. If changing this causes that much of
>> >a difference in your script, wow - you're way ahead
agree, ++$i wont save u nething, it just means that the variable is
incremented after it is used:
$i = 0;
while ($i < 4) echo $i++;
will output
0123
while
$i = 0;
while ($i < 4) echo ++$i;
will output
1234
Tim-Hinnerk Heuer
http://www.ihostnz.com
On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 7:25 PM, Nathan Nob
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 3:10 PM, Clancy wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Dec 2008 10:20:09 +1100, dmag...@gmail.com (Chris) wrote:
>
> >I'd call this a micro-optimization. If changing this causes that much of
> >a difference in your script, wow - you're way ahead of the rest of us.
>
> Schlossnag
On Mon, 22 Dec 2008 10:20:09 +1100, dmag...@gmail.com (Chris) wrote:
>I'd call this a micro-optimization. If changing this causes that much of
>a difference in your script, wow - you're way ahead of the rest of us.
Schlossnagle (in "Advanced PHP Programming") advises:
$i = 0; while
11 matches
Mail list logo
