Php 5.4 vs 5.3: is really fast and with less memory leaks

Re:Php 5.4 vs 5.3: is really fast and with less memory leaks by effu on Tuesday February 07, 2012 @03:08AM (#3560948)

The title of this post is amusing. Only "less memory leaks"? None would be nicer. (Also "fast" is relative. When you're known for one of the slowest interpreters getting large performance increases is easy. It would be better to bench against something that really is fast, like the JVM for example.)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Php 5.4 vs 5.3: is really fast and with less memory leaks by richthegeek on Tuesday February 07, 2012 @04:15AM (#3561114)

Python & Ruby are both slower interpreted languages than PHP, for all their lovely syntax.

The JVM is slower to develop for, and when probably 50% of projects on the web are stuff that's built in less than 2 months, using the JVM adds too much complexity where it really isn't needed.

If you want speed (almost) as good as the JVM without using an interpreted language, use Node. Unless of course you only know the one language from your CompSci days..

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Php 5.4 vs 5.3: is really fast and with less memory leaks by __alexs on Tuesday February 07, 2012 @06:31AM (#3561350)

> Python & Ruby are both slower interpreted languages than PHP

Source? That's not what the Programming Language Benchmark Game says...

http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u64/which-programming-lang...

Although that's probably without an optimiser at all.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Php 5.4 vs 5.3: is really fast and with less memory leaks by sigzero on Tuesday February 07, 2012 @07:23AM (#3561467)

Maybe that should be qualified "in a web context".

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Php 5.4 vs 5.3: is really fast and with less memory leaks by TylerE on Tuesday February 07, 2012 @08:59AM (#3561748)

Still a big [citation needed]. Compare with something like cached Mako templates in Python and I seriously doubt it's competitive.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Php 5.4 vs 5.3: is really fast and with less memory leaks by richthegeek on Tuesday February 07, 2012 @10:01AM (#3561985)

Compare it with a micro-cached Varnish or nginx .. caching is outside of the "speed" parameters. Of course, you could take a look memcached if you want :)

I can't find the reference I remember but it fits roughly with the link posted (the scale seems to match the max times rather the average times). The differences were tiny but the order was PHP, Python, Ruby if I remember correctly (PHP was in front, PR may have been switched).

I'll try get a link but I doubt i'll find it.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Php 5.4 vs 5.3: is really fast and with less memory leaks by TylerE on Tuesday February 07, 2012 @10:16AM (#3562050)

In the case of Mako at least, caching doesn't mean caching in the way you mean it. It's more akin to opcode caching in PHP, saving the actual python code generated from the template, not the result. Just saves from reparsing the template every time it's rendered, but the actual template logic still runs.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Php 5.4 vs 5.3: is really fast and with less memory leaks by odedharth on Tuesday February 07, 2012 @04:39AM (#3561157)

Or use JRuby to get the advantages of ruby with the speed of JVM (http://jruby.org/).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Php 5.4 vs 5.3: is really fast and with less memory leaks by j_col on Tuesday February 07, 2012 @05:15AM (#3561216)

I like JRuby a lot, in fact it's my favourite scripting language on the CLI, but while it's fast to run its damn slow to compile (remember it still has to compile to JVM bytecodes).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Php 5.4 vs 5.3: is really fast and with less memory leaks by lucian1900 on Tuesday February 07, 2012 @12:03PM (#3562579)

I think people often just don't know about recent developments.

PyPy is at least as fast as Node, and Rubinius is also very fast.

[ Parent | on HN ]