[pLog-svn] lt_include

[Oscar Renalias]

Not anymore. I did have an example script but not anymore.
On 13 Mar 2007, at 17:39, Jon Daley wrote:

>  	Do you have a way to benchmark whether it is better to have the
> _once or not?
>
> On Tue, 13 Mar 2007, Oscar Renalias wrote:
>> Yes, we could try that...
>>
>> On 3/12/07, Jon Daley <plogworld at jon.limedaley.com> wrote:
>>>         I hadn't ever looked at lt_include until just now.   
>>> Should we be
>>> calling include() rather than include_once() in lt_include?
>>>
>>>
>>> function lt_include( $filename ){
>>>    if(!isset($GLOBALS['included_files'][$filename] )) {
>>>      include_once($filename);
>>>      $GLOBALS['included_files'][$filename] = TRUE;
>>>    }
>>> }
>>>
>>>         We don't need the _once part, and I would expect that  
>>> include() is
>>> faster than include_once()?
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> pLog-svn mailing list
>>> pLog-svn at devel.lifetype.net
>>> http://limedaley.com/mailman/listinfo/plog-svn
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> pLog-svn mailing list
>> pLog-svn at devel.lifetype.net
>> http://limedaley.com/mailman/listinfo/plog-svn
>>
>
> -- 
> Jon Daley
> http://jon.limedaley.com/
>
> I have opinions of my own, strong opinions, but I don't always  
> agree with them.
> -- George Bush Sr.
> _______________________________________________
> pLog-svn mailing list
> pLog-svn at devel.lifetype.net
> http://limedaley.com/mailman/listinfo/plog-svn
>