Copyright 1998-2010 Tweakers.net Tue, 16 Mar 2010 08:49:07 GMT Tue, 16 Mar 2010 08:49:07 GMT http://tweakers.net/reviews/76 Tweakblogs.net is de weblog service van Tweakers.net, de grootste hardwaresite en techcommunity van Nederland. http://tweakblogs.net/ http://tweakimg.net/g/if/logo.gif 60 60 Tweakblogs.net nl-nl http://drm.tweakblogs.net frontpage@tweakers.net http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3538/twig-the-next-generation-template-engine-for-php.html#r_39785 drm: I'm not saying you need to change to something else. It is just not a fair comparison. XSLT is way more complex than Smarty, and the declarative approach is even harder to explain than plain PHP. To be frank, my opinion about xslt is that it is one of the greatest techniques out there. I have loved XSLT from the first moment I tried it, and actually used it as a template engine for some websites back in the php4 days. But an easy switch from Smarty to XSLT is just not realistic.Ok, I misunderstood your previous comment about XSLT and Smarty not being comparable. I thought your comment was ment as a negative point towards XSLT SoaDmaggot http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3538/twig-the-next-generation-template-engine-for-php.html#r_39785#reacties http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3538#r_39785 Thu, 11 Feb 2010 11:50:06 GMT http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3538/twig-the-next-generation-template-engine-for-php.html#r_39643 afvalzak: Getting late right Indeed SoaDmaggot: @drm I am (and have been) using XSLT as my primairy template engine for quite a while and wouldn't have any arguments on why to change to something else, can you enlighten your opinion about the engine?I'm not saying you need to change to something else. It is just not a fair comparison. XSLT is way more complex than Smarty, and the declarative approach is even harder to explain than plain PHP. To be frank, my opinion about xslt is that it is one of the greatest techniques out there. I have loved XSLT from the first moment I tried it, and actually used it as a template engine for some websites back in the php4 days. But an easy switch from Smarty to XSLT is just not realistic. drm http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3538/twig-the-next-generation-template-engine-for-php.html#r_39643#reacties http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3538#r_39643 Wed, 10 Feb 2010 09:02:44 GMT http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3538/twig-the-next-generation-template-engine-for-php.html#r_39637 @drm I am (and have been) using XSLT as my primairy template engine for quite a while and wouldn't have any arguments on why to change to something else, can you enlighten your opinion about the engine? SoaDmaggot http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3538/twig-the-next-generation-template-engine-for-php.html#r_39637#reacties http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3538#r_39637 Wed, 10 Feb 2010 07:42:34 GMT http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3538/twig-the-next-generation-template-engine-for-php.html#r_39633 explaining Smarty to ... than Smarty.Getting late right Thanks for the blog it's always nice to read about something other then the usual suspects ;-) afvalzak http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3538/twig-the-next-generation-template-engine-for-php.html#r_39633#reacties http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3538#r_39633 Tue, 09 Feb 2010 22:54:30 GMT http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3538/twig-the-next-generation-template-engine-for-php.html#r_39630 First off, I'm not telling anyone to use a template engine, I'm just saying that if you do, Twig is really something to look into.freakingme What is its added value compared to what PHP brings by itself?For me there are two simple reasons. One is brevity, the other is simplicity. Regarding brevity, short tags in PHP are comparable, but imo not as simple or even short. That is a matter of taste, I agree. Secondly, I tend to have less trouble explaining Smarty to non-PHP front-end developers than Smarty PHP.kokx Still, i'm going to ask that question to you . Templating engines only limit what you can do in your view, and that way you will always end up with template-related code in your controllers. If you use PHP itself, you can do anything that PHP can do.I have never had that experience with Smarty, and since Twig seems more powerful and more easily extensible, I'm pretty sure I won't have that experience with Twig either.Also see: http://nosmarty.net/really, this is one of the lamest and most disrespectful flames I have read ever. Fortunately, they can't be taken seriously if they really suggest PHPTAL and XSLT as alternatives to Smarty. It surprises me they didn't suggest JSP drm http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3538/twig-the-next-generation-template-engine-for-php.html#r_39630#reacties http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3538#r_39630 Tue, 09 Feb 2010 21:53:11 GMT http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3538/twig-the-next-generation-template-engine-for-php.html#r_39629 There is no such thing as better, just different approach in separating data and html in a more frontend developer friendly way kwaakvaak_v2 http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3538/twig-the-next-generation-template-engine-for-php.html#r_39629#reacties http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3538#r_39629 Tue, 09 Feb 2010 21:24:01 GMT http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3538/twig-the-next-generation-template-engine-for-php.html#r_39626 So, err, why is this better than Smarty or basic inline PHP again? I wasn't able to discern that from the post. YopY http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3538/twig-the-next-generation-template-engine-for-php.html#r_39626#reacties http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3538#r_39626 Tue, 09 Feb 2010 20:39:29 GMT http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3538/twig-the-next-generation-template-engine-for-php.html#r_39623 Still, i'm going to ask that question to you . Templating engines only limit what you can do in your view, and that way you will always end up with template-related code in your controllers. If you use PHP itself, you can do anything that PHP can do. Also see: http://nosmarty.net/ kokx http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3538/twig-the-next-generation-template-engine-for-php.html#r_39623#reacties http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3538#r_39623 Tue, 09 Feb 2010 20:07:39 GMT http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3538/twig-the-next-generation-template-engine-for-php.html#r_39622 What is its added value compared to what PHP brings by itself? freakingme http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3538/twig-the-next-generation-template-engine-for-php.html#r_39622#reacties http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3538#r_39622 Tue, 09 Feb 2010 20:05:24 GMT http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3517/virtualbox-is-more-free-than-you-might-think.html#r_39307 I'm a moderator on their forum, though haven't been online there for some time due to graduation (about 3 months 'offline'). Over the past few years, a lot more users have found VB and it would be a very bad idea for Oracle to abandon this program. They will loose a big hit in the market, it already is one of the three biggest type-2 virtualizers. Type-2 means it needs a host to run on, like VPC and VMW, unlike ESX. If you check the Editions page, you will see what features are not included in the Open Source (GPLv2) edition. It's USB, VRDP and USB over VRDP. VRDP stands for Virtual Remote Desktop Protocol. In other words, there is an RDP server available for your VMs. See it like HP's iLO system, only limited in use (you can't exactly turn it on, mount media or power-cycle a stuck machine). I'm sure that when Oracle abandons this program, it will probably be forked by some volunteers and made in a new project. @Tim, VirtualBox is dual-licensed. GPLv2 and closed (PUEL). A part from the Licensing FAQ:Why dual licensing? We -- like other companies -- believe that dual licensing gives both developers and users the best of two worlds. While anyone is free to look at the code and even improve it, commercial licenses support the company and allow for professional maintenance and support. The open-source community gets more high-quality free software at no cost, while businesses can rely on quality support from our first-hand developers. Both worlds profit from each other: The commercial licenses support both our business, and the open-source community, and vice versa.Also, it's not really based on Qemu. See the Developer FAQ for more information. As it currently stands, last thing I've heard from one of the main devs, is that there is no trace of Qemu left. VirtualBox can also handle VHD images, so images for VirtualPC will work on it. The IE test images used to work in VB without problems, however, recent changes to the build images made it cause some issues. The default NIC drivers were no longer available, so installing the NIC to actually get to the webserver was problematic. It was also hardware locked, so you would have only 3 days before you needed to activate, but it appeared later that it were 3 reboots instead. You would loose one for installing the NIC in some way and another for a different thing you needed, which I forgot. If you started with a clean image and 3 days/reboots, installing the Additions was enough of a change in drivers it would fail immediately. Luckily, someone from the IEblog responded and promised a change, though on what term was not said. Since a lot of webdevs don't run Windows, that person knew that MS made a big mistake with this 'limitation'. This just proves that VB has a solid base in the market and Oracle would shoot itself in the foot so to say if they drop this. I hope the current devs won't have to fear for their jobs, but from what I've heard from a fellow mod, it seems they are, or at least somehow pushed by the higher ups (note: this is just speculation, I have no idea what is really going on). Hero Of Time http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3517/virtualbox-is-more-free-than-you-might-think.html#r_39307#reacties http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3517#r_39307 Fri, 05 Feb 2010 22:11:12 GMT http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3517/virtualbox-is-more-free-than-you-might-think.html#r_39302 Ever heard of IETester? Stable as a hydrogen atom WeeJeWel http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3517/virtualbox-is-more-free-than-you-might-think.html#r_39302#reacties http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3517#r_39302 Fri, 05 Feb 2010 16:23:42 GMT http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3517/virtualbox-is-more-free-than-you-might-think.html#r_39299 VirtualBox comes in 2 flavours. There is one comercial and one opensource (not that it is GPL licenced)edition. The last one doen´t support usb on host devive and some other things. I use it one FreeBSD happely for a while now. Network and Shares are supported. To bad it can only emulate x86 and no Risc ARM machine. Virtual box is thereby not suiteble vor embeded testing. And also to bad Qemu (i thing Virtualbox is based on this) isn´t supported anymore... Tim http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3517/virtualbox-is-more-free-than-you-might-think.html#r_39299#reacties http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3517#r_39299 Fri, 05 Feb 2010 15:16:10 GMT http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3517/virtualbox-is-more-free-than-you-might-think.html#r_39280 What's the meuktracker? Sounds interesting though John http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3517/virtualbox-is-more-free-than-you-might-think.html#r_39280#reacties http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3517#r_39280 Fri, 05 Feb 2010 12:57:25 GMT http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3517/virtualbox-is-more-free-than-you-might-think.html#r_39277 Before I installed it on my Work laptop I have read carefully the license. It was hard to understand, but after long searching I was certain it was safe to use. I think the development will continue, so Oracle can also supply/sell virtual appliances without the need for other parties (like VmWare). SPee http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3517/virtualbox-is-more-free-than-you-might-think.html#r_39277#reacties http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3517#r_39277 Fri, 05 Feb 2010 11:08:28 GMT http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3517/virtualbox-is-more-free-than-you-might-think.html#r_39273 If you have a copy of Windows 7 then you can download MS Virtual PC for free, including a Windows XP virtual PC for legacy software which does not run in Windows 7. golfdiesel http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3517/virtualbox-is-more-free-than-you-might-think.html#r_39273#reacties http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3517#r_39273 Fri, 05 Feb 2010 10:36:51 GMT http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3517/virtualbox-is-more-free-than-you-might-think.html#r_39268 Question is: will it stay like this now that Oracle owns it? There has barely been said something about VirtualBox (& other things like OpenSolaris e.g.) since the acquisition of Sun. Edit: in addition to Teedee & The Lord: the mentioned Virtual PC images can be found here @golfdiesel: this is only true for Windows 7 Professional & up @SPee: no doubt that the development will continue, but will it stay open-source? Will it stay as free as it is now? And even then, maybe they 'll do it like this: VirtualBox as it is now only receives sporadic updates (like support for new guest OS'es etc) & stays free. At the same time, they create "VirtualBox Enterprise", in which they heavily invest & add all kinds of new features to, but which isn't free anymore? Oracle + Sun...I 'm still far from convinced terje7601 http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3517/virtualbox-is-more-free-than-you-might-think.html#r_39268#reacties http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3517#r_39268 Fri, 05 Feb 2010 09:42:25 GMT http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3517/virtualbox-is-more-free-than-you-might-think.html#r_39267 Also, when I wanted to download VMWare Player, I was required to fill out a large form with a lot of detailed personal information before I could get to the link. Since VirtualBox happily plays VMWare images, I went to their site and could download it directly without having to submit any7 personal information Vaudtje http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3517/virtualbox-is-more-free-than-you-might-think.html#r_39267#reacties http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3517#r_39267 Fri, 05 Feb 2010 09:40:41 GMT http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3517/virtualbox-is-more-free-than-you-might-think.html#r_39266 Indeed, this has been known for a long time by a lot of tweakers. Everytime VBox makes it to the meuktracker someone mentions it and it is also covered in a lot of other places. But what surprises me more is that a lot of VBox users don't know it. It's in the license agreement you agree with when installing the software and yet ppl don't read it. Blokker_1999 http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3517/virtualbox-is-more-free-than-you-might-think.html#r_39266#reacties http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3517#r_39266 Fri, 05 Feb 2010 09:26:07 GMT http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3517/virtualbox-is-more-free-than-you-might-think.html#r_39262 Microsoft did publish a virtual IE some while ago especially aimed for testing. As far as I can remenber this is a VPC VHD with full OS (XP SP3) with IE installed on it. It was freely downloadable for public use and had an expiration set. But it could be downloaded as many times as necessary. So expiration does not really matter anymore. The Lord http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3517/virtualbox-is-more-free-than-you-might-think.html#r_39262#reacties http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3517#r_39262 Fri, 05 Feb 2010 08:26:38 GMT http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3517/virtualbox-is-more-free-than-you-might-think.html#r_39256 Its more than once said in the meuktracker... Jogai http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3517/virtualbox-is-more-free-than-you-might-think.html#r_39256#reacties http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3517#r_39256 Fri, 05 Feb 2010 06:54:04 GMT http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3517/virtualbox-is-more-free-than-you-might-think.html#r_39253 Drop support for Internet Explorer 6.. easy as that. Sgreehder http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3517/virtualbox-is-more-free-than-you-might-think.html#r_39253#reacties http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3517#r_39253 Fri, 05 Feb 2010 00:53:55 GMT http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3517/virtualbox-is-more-free-than-you-might-think.html#r_39249 Well, there are lot of people using VirtualBox very happily as 'replacement' for VirtualPC with windows + IE6. I'm a linux user, but my university just forces me to use windows over and over again. So I just use MSDNAA to get windows copies, and I run them in VirtualBox. And I'm quite sure that I'm not the only one doing this. VirtualBox is a lot more open them VMWare, so I like it a lot more . kokx http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3517/virtualbox-is-more-free-than-you-might-think.html#r_39249#reacties http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3517#r_39249 Thu, 04 Feb 2010 23:53:16 GMT http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3517/virtualbox-is-more-free-than-you-might-think.html#r_39248 Hmm, Virtualbox is a bliss. I agree. However, if you want to test stuff on XP and IE6; Microsoft has a couple of VirtualPC images available with XP and IE6 (amongst other!). These VPC images do not require you to have all licenses needed, so I think that's a little bit cheaper. Since you're not running Windows (am I correct...?) this might get tricky Regarding the terms of Vbox I must admit I've never read them... (as with a lot of other terms in other applications) but the license/usage is pretty straightforward: use it! We don't care. You only need to pay is, if you're going to use it as a server thing or something. Funny thing though: don't even try to install OS X on virtualbox... It won't work. TeeDee http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3517/virtualbox-is-more-free-than-you-might-think.html#r_39248#reacties http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3517#r_39248 Thu, 04 Feb 2010 23:46:01 GMT http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3510/hiphop-the-talk-of-the-day.html#r_39166 Sidenote: It's going to be the talk of the week, clearly ... drm http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3510/hiphop-the-talk-of-the-day.html#r_39166#reacties http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3510#r_39166 Thu, 04 Feb 2010 14:09:45 GMT http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3510/hiphop-the-talk-of-the-day.html#r_39154 Exactlt Jory167, facebook looked upon this matter from a business point of view, not like most other reactions on this blog from a technical point of view. It's just plain cheaper to use a small team (in the video there where 6 people) to develop something like hiphop, then retrain 350 programmers and reinvent wheels again. Facebook spent about 5 to 6 years developing their current codebase. Most likely made a few framework's to support the clustering and scaling of the site etc. To rewrite that into a different language would mean they had to throw away everything they made upon till now and restart. Not impossible, but from a business point of view it means burning money. I think it's smart route they picked, but as stated in other posts about this on the web, it's not a route for the majority of websites out there. No matter how important a average php developer thinks his/her site is, it's no facebook when i comes to scaling/performance. It's a fun route, from a developer point of view, to see how well your current code could transform into C++, but it's useless for most of us. kwaakvaak_v2 http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3510/hiphop-the-talk-of-the-day.html#r_39154#reacties http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3510#r_39154 Thu, 04 Feb 2010 09:12:49 GMT http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3510/hiphop-the-talk-of-the-day.html#r_39153 Thank God the world doesn't stop with one webserver. Never the less the most interesting in the last month that I had observed was that an actual webserver written in PHP with a reverse proxy in front of it beat the performance of any fastcgi or mod_php setup.Of course it doesn't. But then afaik it is still the best webserver option for php. To my knowledge all the fastcgi-setups are either slower or much less convenient to manage, apart from the loss of several useful features in various cases. Do you have a link to the PHP-server you mention here?True, however, they've worked for two (!) years on this project, and this makes me wonder - wouldn't it be easier to retrain their developers, hire some new people, and switch to another language altogether?Their point was that that wouldn't have been easier. Besides, even if you did retrain those people, you'd loose the advantages PHP has (which at least they claim (and I agree) there are!). Especially in the rapid release area.In my humble opinion creating an application, where required is better than making a webserver+application server that under performs and has to cache everything to get performance.They already have that, a lot, as I understand it. PHP is already mostly a glue-language between their various backend applications and (specialized) databases and a templating environment to display all the gathered data. But if you can make your normal webservers, of which they have a lot as well, run so much faster that you can decrease your investments in new machines at the scale they do... that is a very interesting project. ACM http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3510/hiphop-the-talk-of-the-day.html#r_39153#reacties http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3510#r_39153 Thu, 04 Feb 2010 08:42:40 GMT http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3510/hiphop-the-talk-of-the-day.html#r_39152 I would have liked to see Facebook joining the efforts to create a LLVM based PHP JIT-compiler rather than creating a source code transformer. However, I must say Google's effort to create a LLVM based Python interpretor (http://code.google.com/p/unladen-swallow/) isn't really working out either, the only reason why their benchmarks look good is because they are looking at worst case Python code and comparing to just older versions of unladen-swallow. However, I do expect LLVM can have a promising future, especially if a lot of different projects use it for different purposes. Elijan9 http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3510/hiphop-the-talk-of-the-day.html#r_39152#reacties http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3510#r_39152 Thu, 04 Feb 2010 08:31:40 GMT http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3510/hiphop-the-talk-of-the-day.html#r_39139 YopY, three guys spent two years on it (well, not exactly, it comes down to about four man-years) on the project. In all likelyhood, those three guys could have never rewritten Facebook, or even just some core parts, in that time. Plus, when you're rewriting, you're not improving, you're doing work to make something you already have. Plus, they have a development team of about 350 people. You can't retrain them all, and firing those that can't be retrained into C/Java/whatever developers and hiring new people to replace them isn't going to be very economic. And for things like social networking websites, being able to adapt quickly is important. If you want short release cycles, you'll probably want to use something like PHP and not something like Java. For people interested in a (whole) bunch of articles on HipHop for PHP, http://www.planet-php.net/search/hiphop has a nice (not so little) list. Jory167 http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3510/hiphop-the-talk-of-the-day.html#r_39139#reacties http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3510#r_39139 Wed, 03 Feb 2010 21:39:29 GMT http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3510/hiphop-the-talk-of-the-day.html#r_39138 I highly doubt refactoring their current code will give them the same performance increase as HipHop That all depends on the quality of the current PHP code, doesn't it? drm http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3510/hiphop-the-talk-of-the-day.html#r_39138#reacties http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3510#r_39138 Wed, 03 Feb 2010 21:35:29 GMT http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3510/hiphop-the-talk-of-the-day.html#r_39137 True, however, they've worked for two (!) years on this project, and this makes me wonder - wouldn't it be easier to retrain their developers, hire some new people, and switch to another language altogether?I agree with you here, the good choice is to code high used parts and locking parts in a low level language, such as C. Just create a webserver extention that handles all your posts and database updates. In my humble opinion creating an application, where required is better than making a webserver+application server that under performs and has to cache everything to get performance.I mean sure, PHP's a nice language, and good enough for most things, but if you're investing time and a lot of money in making a round peg fit a square hole (because the square hole's bigger, thus faster), are you sure you should stick with the round peg?If they really created a compiler, php=>object code. That could have been a killer, but I guess you might be able to do that with the object code that PHP makes internally anyway. Skinkie http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3510/hiphop-the-talk-of-the-day.html#r_39137#reacties http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3510#r_39137 Wed, 03 Feb 2010 21:34:22 GMT http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3510/hiphop-the-talk-of-the-day.html#r_39136 I highly doubt refactoring their current code will give them the same performance increase as HipHop afraca http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3510/hiphop-the-talk-of-the-day.html#r_39136#reacties http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3510#r_39136 Wed, 03 Feb 2010 21:27:31 GMT http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3510/hiphop-the-talk-of-the-day.html#r_39135 quote: SkinkieThis new C++ translator just shows that PHP is a programming language. And any programming language can be translated into any other language applying a constant function to it.True, however, they've worked for two (!) years on this project, and this makes me wonder - wouldn't it be easier to retrain their developers, hire some new people, and switch to another language altogether? I mean sure, PHP's a nice language, and good enough for most things, but if you're investing time and a lot of money in making a round peg fit a square hole (because the square hole's bigger, thus faster), are you sure you should stick with the round peg? Yes, analogies ftw. If they had good programmers, they could've easily spend the same two years rewriting their core components in Java, C++, C#, ASP.NET, or any language that performed better without losing (much) in the flexibility the language offers - insofar that still exists when working on a big / important project like Facebook (since I can imagine they'd have stringent rules and guidelines for writing code for that). YopY http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3510/hiphop-the-talk-of-the-day.html#r_39135#reacties http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3510#r_39135 Wed, 03 Feb 2010 21:26:07 GMT http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3510/hiphop-the-talk-of-the-day.html#r_39132 drm, I don't understand the semi-flames to the PHP-developers of FacebookI don't intend to flame. As I understood it, they chose for building HipHop over a refactoring of the current code to get the same performance increase... That rang some alarm bells for me. That's all. drm http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3510/hiphop-the-talk-of-the-day.html#r_39132#reacties http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3510#r_39132 Wed, 03 Feb 2010 21:19:29 GMT http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3510/hiphop-the-talk-of-the-day.html#r_39129 "appaerantly Apache can't"Thank God the world doesn't stop with one webserver. Never the less the most interesting in the last month that I had observed was that an actual webserver written in PHP with a reverse proxy in front of it beat the performance of any fastcgi or mod_php setup. I thought the claim of lightspeed was that their LS 'undocumented' interface was good... this was mind blowing. This new C++ translator just shows that PHP is a programming language. And any programming language can be translated into any other language applying a constant function to it. Skinkie http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3510/hiphop-the-talk-of-the-day.html#r_39129#reacties http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3510#r_39129 Wed, 03 Feb 2010 20:11:00 GMT http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3510/hiphop-the-talk-of-the-day.html#r_39122 Skinkie, there is also Quercus which aims to translate PHP into Java bytecode at runtime and lets the JIT/HotSpot-magic of the JDK do its work. The performance-gains aren't super large since they still allow weak/dynamic typing. Then again, you're not there if you have HipHop working on your code... You still need some runtime environment that can actually run your code (appaerantly Apache can't), while Quercus aims to be just another PHP-runtime, rather than a translator to alternative code. drm, I don't understand the semi-flames to the PHP-developers of Facebook. Even the very best PHP-developers in the world can do only so much with PHP to achieve the best possible performance. If you want more performance, you can try and transform your (good) PHP-programmers in good Java/C++-programmers and have them work long hours to convert (even more parts of) a large code-base, or you can try and improve/circumvent the interpreter and use the original code if possible. Facebook seems to have taken the latter road. By the way, if you're not running a at least a rack full of php-servers you're probably not going to need a special optimized compiler+runtime like HipHop, you'll have to look really hard into just rewriting parts of the expensive PHP-stuff to (asynchronous) services, rather than trying to increase the PHP-performance with tools that make deployment and debugging even harder than it is now. ACM http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3510/hiphop-the-talk-of-the-day.html#r_39122#reacties http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3510#r_39122 Wed, 03 Feb 2010 19:30:36 GMT http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3510/hiphop-the-talk-of-the-day.html#r_39121 I'm wondering why Facebook didn't look at the PHP to Java compiler from Caucho 'Quercus' first. Although the free version only interprets the PHP code, a commercial version is also available and this one compiles the code into Java. When then a Java VM is used which compiles the bytecode into machine code the same effect might be achieved, however with lesser costs. It is even possible that the end result is even more stable than the current C++ code generated... Little Penguin http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3510/hiphop-the-talk-of-the-day.html#r_39121#reacties http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3510#r_39121 Wed, 03 Feb 2010 19:28:23 GMT http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3510/hiphop-the-talk-of-the-day.html#r_39118 When I reading the title this came into my brain: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQBllqvxMl4 Faust http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3510/hiphop-the-talk-of-the-day.html#r_39118#reacties http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3510#r_39118 Wed, 03 Feb 2010 19:22:55 GMT http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3510/hiphop-the-talk-of-the-day.html#r_39114 You might wonder if a GJC compiler is not what you want for PHP, Python et al. A compiler to C++ seems to be a wrong choice, just because C++ is OO, it isn't a good intermediate language per se. Skinkie http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3510/hiphop-the-talk-of-the-day.html#r_39114#reacties http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3510#r_39114 Wed, 03 Feb 2010 19:15:00 GMT http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3475/ubuntu-910-karmic-installation-not-so-positive.html#r_38945 Well, I reverted back to debian unstable. Unfortunately, the little episode with the hard disks wasn't over after Ubuntu installed. Grub didn't seem to like the fact that I reconnected my secondary hard disk, and grub couldn't find the /dev/disk/by-uuid entry the first hard disk was on during installation. So I couldn't boot Ubuntu nor Windows, since Windows wasn't originally configured in Grub in the first place. A reinstall using the debian netinstall solved all my problems. I have found other people having trouble with the uuid being somehow reset, but I can't figure why adding a hard disk (without doing anything special in the BIOS) should be problem .... I might give it another try in due time, but for now, Ubuntu really is a no go for me. drm http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3475/ubuntu-910-karmic-installation-not-so-positive.html#r_38945#reacties http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3475#r_38945 Mon, 01 Feb 2010 19:19:18 GMT http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3475/ubuntu-910-karmic-installation-not-so-positive.html#r_38699 I'm not happy with 9.10 either. 9.04 ran rather well on my old laptop, but 9.10 is giving me headaches that 9.04 didn't. For example: video is messed up. On the same Radeon 7000 (mobile) that 9.04 had absolutely no issues with. I happened upon someone with the same problem that was nice enough to post a decent working xorg.conf, and all was well. Until a month or so ago, when the problem returned. I suspect that some update screwed things up but I'm getting rather tired of going through the innards of my installation to have it fixed. It's not a huge deal, it's annoying is what it is, and 10.04 is rearing its head by now so I can't be bothered at the moment. But I have to add to that the fact that I cannot simply update my installation anymore without it saying "hey I can't update the whole thing, how would you like a partial upgrade?", It even went as far as to call it a distro upgrade at one point, leaving me wondering what on earth I was going to end up with afterwards, seeing as how 9.04 was, and is, in fact, the latest release still. So the update mechanism is broken. Not the first time, but it'd been a while. Again, with 10.04 coming reasonably soon, I can't be bothered anymore. Fuck it. Lately I've been thinking that maybe I should simply abandon Ubuntu. I'm getting so tired of the regressions, each and every version has different problems, most of which didn't exist in the prior version (I'll note that I've been using Ubuntu as my primary OS since I think somewhere in '06). When 10.04 is released, I will wait a few days and if all hell didn't break loose, I'll install it and give it one last try. Just one. Because if 10.04 will suck, that'll be the last Ubuntu I install for a while. I hate to admit it, I really, genuinely, honestly hate it, but the blogposting astrocore linked to really hits home for me. Two years ago, heck, even one year ago, Ubuntu was it. It was awesome and the small annoyances it had, surely they would be a thing of the past come the next release. I have been disappointed and annoyed a bit too much now, and I absolutely have no intentions of hacking away at my Ubuntu installation. That's not what it was made for. If I want a Linuxinstallation that I'm going to dig through for configuration and all that, I'll install Slackware again. Slackware.. the other distribution I am a big fan of. And with Slackware, I know that I have to configure it by myself. And it was made just for that. 10.04 is going to have to be good. Not even great, just good. If it works good - and I'm a pretty tolerant guy who knows there's no such thing as perfection - I will once again love Ubuntu like I have. But if it sucks I'll give up hope. Cyphax http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3475/ubuntu-910-karmic-installation-not-so-positive.html#r_38699#reacties http://drm.tweakblogs.net/blog/3475#r_38699 Thu, 28 Jan 2010 19:51:08 GMT