> In fact, this is a poor example since the difference gets larger with longer > string and more arguments. When you use dots, the interpreter has to > actually concatenate the string, looking for memory to do so and freeing it > up afterwards. This takes time. With commas, each argument is sent to the > output stream as soon as it is found, no further processing is needed in > between. > I have been wondering about this topic for a few months now, so thanks for this fascinating explanation. Is this the only difference between using . and , as concatenation operators> > Then the single vs. double quotes: > > echo 'uno ' , ' dos ' , ' tres ': 0.94 > echo "uno " , " dos " , " tres ": 6.76 > > Notice that when variables are involved, the difference in between echoing > with arguments separated with commas and separated with dots is more than 9 > times faster for the commas. Using double quotes with variable expansion > is almost 4 times slower than the commas, but is still faster than > concatenating them externaly with dots. Using heredoc-style strings is not > so bad compared to double quotes. Never heard of heredoc before. What is it for? I have read http://uk.php.net/types.string and can only imagine that it is for laying out complex or long strings more clearly > > So, if you are sending out the rule would be: > Use echo, not print. Separate arguments with commas. > > Now, if you are not using echo, for example, concatenating to a variable, > the best is to use variable expansion inside double quoted or heredoc > strings. Concatenating with dots is more than twice as slow. > > Satyam -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
