[UPHPU] require_once vs. class_exists

[Sean]

That's wrong, if you install apc and use it's we interface, you can use 
autoload and it will show that the all the files are getting cached.

Alvaro Carrasco wrote:
> Rusty Keele wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>>   Which is a better approach to use:
>>     1. require_once('path/to/class.php');
>>
>>   or
>>
>>   2. if(!class_exists('path/to/class.php')) 
>> require('path/to/class.php');
>>
>>   I have been using the first approach in all my files where I need 
>> to instantiate a specific class, but I am wondering if the second 
>> approach is more efficient?  Are there any benefits to using the 
>> second approach - such as less caching of objects - or do these two 
>> statements do the same thing?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Rusty
>>
>>
>>
>>   
>
> Keep in mind that f you are using a byte-code cache such a APC or 
> eAccelerator (you're using one, right :) ), it probably won't be able 
> to cache the code for classes that are included conditionally.
> So, the performance when using a byte-code cache generally goes 
> something like this:
>
> require                                           best
> require_once                                  ok
> autoload or conditional include        bad
>
> Alvaro
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> UPHPU mailing list
> UPHPU at uphpu.org
> http://uphpu.org/mailman/listinfo/uphpu
> IRC: #uphpu on irc.freenode.net
>
>


-- 

Sean Thayne,
Exit12