Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- rfc:function_autoloading [2013/08/30 12:28] – add constant benchmark ircmaxell
+++ rfc:function_autoloading [2013/09/03 12:28] – Withdrawn ircmaxell
@@ Line 4: / Line 4: @@
   * Date: 2013-08-29
   * Author: Anthony Ferrara <ircmaxell@php.net>
-  * Status: Draft
+  * Status: Withdrawn
   * First Published at: http://wiki.php.net/rfc/function_autoloading
@@ Line 261: / Line 261: @@
 It is more of a "why not" question. Supporting multiple types of autoloaded constructs in a single callback can result in a more flexible architecture for end users.
+==== What Filename Conventions Does This Support? ====
+None, and all. This proposal presently implements no type of file loading handler.
+The only thing that is implemented is the ability to register a callback to attempt to load a function or constant (or class) when it is missing. How the callback maps structures to files is outside of the scope of this RFC.
+==== Doesn't This Complicate The Engine? ====
+Nope! The reason is that the current autoloading mechanism for classes is extremely fragile as is.
+For example, the implementation hinges on a global variable which sets the php-level callback to call on autoload. This requires setting up a //zend_fcall_info// struct, and a //zend_fcall_info_cache// struct, as well as dispatching a function internally to autoload. [[https://github.com/php/php-src/blob/9e17094cf4dde60432569246a9a59e48783530bb/Zend/zend_execute_API.c#L1066|The Current Implementation]].
+The implementation of //spl_autoload_call// and //spl_autoload_register// are also extremely complicated. [[https://github.com/php/php-src/blob/9e17094cf4dde60432569246a9a59e48783530bb/ext/spl/php_spl.c#L466|The current SPL implementation]].
+This refactor cleans both of these pieces up significantly.
 ===== Backward Incompatible Changes =====

Differences

Page Tools