Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: PHP Working On A "Next Generation" Branch

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,660

    Default PHP Working On A "Next Generation" Branch

    Phoronix: PHP Working On A "Next Generation" Branch

    PHP developers have shared they are currently developing phpng, a next-generation branch of the code working towards JIT compilation...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTcwMzI

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    36

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by phoronix View Post
    Phoronix: PHP Working On A "Next Generation" Branch

    PHP developers have shared they are currently developing phpng, a next-generation branch of the code working towards JIT compilation...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTcwMzI

    Why reinvent the wheel ?

    facebook have already done a lot of work with http://hhvm.com/

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    2,145

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by spirit View Post
    Why reinvent the wheel ?

    facebook have already done a lot of work with http://hhvm.com/
    Because their wheel is triangle shaped.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    56

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by droidhacker View Post
    Because their wheel is triangle shaped.
    A really fast one though. I do think that HHVM could have the potential of replacing PHP altogether if the PHP people decided to drop some legacy PHP stuff HHVM don't support. Sure some rough angles would remain, but HHVM is already where this PHP NG is heading.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    442

    Default

    JIT is awesome and all, but it doesn't stop PHP from being a bad language.

    Don't get me wrong, I USE it and I LIKE using it, but they could introduce some breakage in version 6 to steer it towards a better direction... (drop a bunch of legacy stuff, rename poorly named functions, etc)
    Function naming:
    http://phpsadness.com/sad/4
    http://phpsadness.com/sad/48
    http://phpsadness.com/sad/15
    Just as examples.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Hungary
    Posts
    191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Daktyl198 View Post
    JIT is awesome and all, but it doesn't stop PHP from being a bad language.

    Don't get me wrong, I USE it and I LIKE using it, but they could introduce some breakage in version 6 to steer it towards a better direction... (drop a bunch of legacy stuff, rename poorly named functions, etc)
    Function naming:
    http://phpsadness.com/sad/4
    http://phpsadness.com/sad/48
    http://phpsadness.com/sad/15
    Just as examples.
    It's changed a lot, but function naming probably wont be fixed until/if they implement methods on primitive types, this would give them the perfect opportunity to sort out the majority of the issues.

    You should also read this article, or at least the last section about upcoming changes to PHP: http://nbsp.io/you-cant-tell-me-php-hasnt-changed/

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by psychoticmeow View Post
    It's changed a lot, but function naming probably wont be fixed until/if they implement methods on primitive types, this would give them the perfect opportunity to sort out the majority of the issues.

    You should also read this article, or at least the last section about upcoming changes to PHP: http://nbsp.io/you-cant-tell-me-php-hasnt-changed/
    I don't want to nit pick but if there are methods on primitives.. they wouldn't be primitives in the first place?

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    442

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by psychoticmeow View Post
    It's changed a lot, but function naming probably wont be fixed until/if they implement methods on primitive types, this would give them the perfect opportunity to sort out the majority of the issues.

    You should also read this article, or at least the last section about upcoming changes to PHP: http://nbsp.io/you-cant-tell-me-php-hasnt-changed/
    The first link:
    That all looks very interesting (it might give me a reason to finally start using the OO interface more than when is absolutely necessary ), but I don't really agree with his comment of "The vast majority of math functions donít do well as methods either."... I feel like if you're going to introduce a new Method-based API for two variable types, you should include it on any others that may benefit from it. Stringing together math functions can be just as messy as string functions (that he criticized earlier in the article), so this new API could definitely help with that...

    Link two:
    That's just awesome... not much to say there

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •