[FX.php List] The skinny on includes
steve at bluecrocodile.co.nz
Wed Jun 22 15:51:38 MDT 2011
See http://arin.me/blog/php-require-vs-include-vs-require_once-vs-include_once-performance-test in the end I think he concludes that x_once is much quicker than x, but that the functional difference between include_once and require_once is more important than the speed...
Ad always YMMV
PS see you at devCon...?
Sent from the iPhone of Steve Winter
steve at matatirosolutions.co.uk
+44 777 852 4776
On 21 Jun 2011, at 20:41, Bob Patin <bob at patin.com> wrote:
> Here's my question:
> At the top of my page, when I'm including the FX.php function page and my DB config page, which should I use:
> I saw a post the other day where someone said that include_once takes something like 10x longer to process; true?
> All this time I've been using "include_once" and now I'm wondering if I've been needlessly slowing things down.
> Bob Patin
> Longterm Solutions
> bob at longtermsolutions.com
> iChat: bobpatin
> FileMaker 9, 10 & 11 Certified Developer
> Member of FileMaker Business Alliance and FileMaker TechNet
> Expert FileMaker Consulting
> FileMaker Hosting for all versions of FileMaker
> PHP • Full email services • Free DNS hosting • Colocation • Consulting:
> FX.php_List mailing list
> FX.php_List at mail.iviking.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the FX.php_List