Home/ Questions/Q 8638943
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Asked: 2026-06-12T10:52:13+00:00

For example, if I implement some simple object caching, which method is faster? 1.

  • 0

For example, if I implement some simple object caching, which method is faster?

1. return isset($cache[$cls]) ? $cache[$cls] : $cache[$cls] = new $cls;

2. return @$cache[$cls] ?: $cache[$cls] = new $cls;

I read somewhere @ takes significant time to execute (and I wonder why), especially when warnings/notices are actually being issued and suppressed. isset() on the other hand means an extra hash lookup. So which is better and why?

I do want to keep E_NOTICE on globally, both on dev and production servers.

Share

Leave an answer

You must login to add an answer.

Need An Account,

1 Answer

  1. Editorial Team

    I ran timing tests for both cases, using hash keys of various lengths, also using various hit/miss ratios for the hash table, plus with and without E_NOTICE.

    The results were: with error_reporting(E_ALL) the isset() variant was faster than the @ by some 20-30%. Platform used: command line PHP 5.4.7 on OS X 10.8.

    However, with error_reporting(E_ALL & ~E_NOTICE) the difference was within 1-2% for short hash keys, and up 10% for longer ones (16 chars).

    Note that the first variant executes 2 hash table lookups, whereas the variant with @ does only one lookup.

    Thus, @ is inferior in all scenarios and I wonder if there are any plans to optimize it.

    • 0