On Thu, January 19, 2006 7:09 am, Jochem Maas wrote:
> Barry wrote:
>> Rodolfo Andrade wrote:
> and people will love you if you'r files are 90% comments :-)
Actually, the times I've seen THAT much commenting, it was generally a
lot of useless "noise" and I hated it...
Consider this common practic
Austin Denyer wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 14:09:00 +0100
Jochem Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
in real life you won't notice the overhead at all.
and people will love you if you'r files are 90% comments :-)
I've never been quite that liberal with my comments, but I do have a
few files that a
On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 14:09:00 +0100
Jochem Maas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> in real life you won't notice the overhead at all.
> and people will love you if you'r files are 90% comments :-)
I've never been quite that liberal with my comments, but I do have a
few files that are >50% comments...
Barry wrote:
Rodolfo Andrade wrote:
Hi all!
I would like to know if comments in the code affects the performance.
I know
that comments are ignored by the interpreter, but it does increase the
file
size, so I was thinking about a possible performance hit for highly
commented files.
Can anyo
On Tue, 26 Jul 2005, Matthew Weier O'Phinney wrote:
this could be a silly question. Is there some performance penalty when
using the <<< operator [in heredoc]
Try doing some benchmarks using microtime(). My gut reaction is that
there shouldn't be any difference; heredoc syntax is simply another
* Thus wrote Luis Bernardo:
> You may find this useful: http://www.hudzilla.org/php/18_1_0.php
paragraphs 2 & 3 should be deleted. telling someone that optimal
code is acceptable is like saying storing the year in a 2 char
field is perfectly fine.
Curt
--
The above comments may offend you. flam
6 matches
Mail list logo
