On 1/6/2010 7:18 PM, clancy_1@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
I have a flexible program, which can do many different things according to the type of data it is fed. Ideally the flexibility is achieved by calling different functions, though when the functionality is ill-defined I sometimes just include blocks of code. Ideally, from the point of program maintenance, each module should not be too long -- preferably just a page or so. This doesn't raise problems in a compiled language, but in an interpreted language like PHP the programmer must decide whether to lump a whole lot of functions into a single large include file, or to include lots of little files as the particular functions are needed. The first case can lead to memory bloat, as there are likely to be a lot of unused functions in memory on any given pass, whereas the second case may require lots of little files to be loaded. Are there likely to be significant performance costs for either approach, and what are your feelings about the relative virtues of the two approaches?
It is highly unlikely you are going to create any significant "memory bloat". Your code will likely be infinitesimal compared PHP's memory requirement.
I suggest 3 files, one with your configuration settings, so they are all in one place and easy to find and change, another file with your functions and the third file contains the code for handling the internet interface. Obviously, the interface file controls everything by calling various functions as needed.
Al....... -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
