Laravel 5.1 的 Facade 类 的 __callStatic 方法代码如下:
public static function __callStatic($method, $args)
{
$instance = static::getFacadeRoot();
if (! $instance) {
throw new RuntimeException('A facade root has not been set.');
}
switch (count($args)) {
case 0:
return $instance->$method();
case 1:
return $instance->$method($args[0]);
case 2:
return $instance->$method($args[0], $args[1]);
case 3:
return $instance->$method($args[0], $args[1], $args[2]);
case 4:
return $instance->$method($args[0], $args[1], $args[2], $args[3]);
default:
return call_user_func_array([$instance, $method], $args);
}
}
为什么不直接写成:
public static function __callStatic($method, $args)
{
$instance = static::getFacadeRoot();
if (! $instance) {
throw new RuntimeException('A facade root has not been set.');
}
return call_user_func_array([$instance, $method], $args);
}
回答
答:call_user_func_array 效率偏低。
基准测试如下
对比范围
直接调用
变量函数调用
call_user_func 调用
call_user_func_array 调用
测试结果
我们可以看到,call_user_func_array 所用时间为:1.1608240604401s
测试过程
测试代码如下:
error_reporting(E_ALL | E_STRICT);
define('ITERATIONS', 2000000);
class Bench
{
private $bench_name;
private $start_time;
private $end_time;
public function start($name)
{
$this->bench_name = $name;
$this->start_time = microtime(true);
}
public function end()
{
$this->end_time = microtime(true);
echo "Call style: " . $this->bench_name . '; ' . ($this->end_time - $this->start_time) . " seconds". PHP_EOL;
}
}
class Test
{
public function test($a, $b, $c)
{
return;
}
}
$bench = new Bench();
$test = new Test();
$arg = [1, 2, 3];
$func_name = 'test';
$bench->start('normal');
for ($i=0; $i < ITERATIONS; ++$i) {
$test->test($arg[0], $arg[1], $arg[2]);
}
$bench->end();
$bench->start('var_function');
for ($i=0; $i < ITERATIONS; ++$i) {
$test->$func_name($arg[0], $arg[1], $arg[2]);
}
$bench->end();
$bench->start('call_user_func');
for ($i=0; $i < ITERATIONS; ++$i) {
call_user_func([$test, $func_name], $arg[0], $arg[1], $arg[2]);
}
$bench->end();
$bench->start('call_user_func_array');
for ($i=0; $i < ITERATIONS; ++$i) {
call_user_func_array([$test, $func_name], $arg);
}
$bench->end();
题主是不是看错了或者看的是修改过的源码,原始laravel中并没有发现存在这些代码,能否标出具体的laravel版本和文件路径
我看到的laravel的 Facade 类中代码是这样的
/**
* Handle dynamic, static calls to the object.
*
* @param string $method
* @param array $args
* @return mixed
*
* @throws \RuntimeException
*/
public static function __callStatic($method, $args)
{
$instance = static::getFacadeRoot();
if (! $instance) {
throw new RuntimeException('A facade root has not been set.');
}
return $instance->$method(...$args);
}
这问题我也纳闷. mark, 看会不会遇到能解答这个问题的人.
我刚刚创建了一个laravel的项目
"laravel/framework": "5.5.*"
然后看了源码:
/**
* Handle dynamic, static calls to the object.
*
* @param string $method
* @param array $args
* @return mixed
*
* @throws \RuntimeException
*/
public static function __callStatic($method, $args)
{
$instance = static::getFacadeRoot();
if (! $instance) {
throw new RuntimeException('A facade root has not been set.');
}
return $instance->$method(...$args);
}
额 题主是什么版本的啊? 感觉跟楼上就几个同学看到的一样啊
三个…不定参数的写法是php 5.6版本才有的新特性,我猜可能框架5.1版本的时候还没支持php新特性的吧
光看题主的问题, php 中的 call_user_func_array() 并不慢, 相反这个比普通的函数执行更快, 因为这个在 php7 添加为语言结构(其他语言结构, 比如 echo), 这个信息可以从鸟哥的博客获取到.
另外 laravel 中 facade 中多这样一层封装, 其实是使用 __callStatic() 函数实现, 这个稍微会有一点性能损失.
Iterations: 100 000
Averaged over: 10
PHP 5.6.30 (cli) (built: Jan 18 2017 19:47:28)
Overall Average
Invocation
Time (s)
Delta (s)
%
directFunction
0.0089
-0.0211
-70.19
directStatic
0.0098
-0.0202
-67.39
directLambda
0.0109
-0.0191
-63.52
directInstance
0.0116
-0.0184
-61.31
directClosure
0.0150
-0.0150
-50.15
Invoke
0.0282
-0.0018
-6.13
call_user_func
0.0300
ClosureFactory
0.0316
+0.0016
+5.20
assignedClosureFactory
0.0328
+0.0028
+9.28
call_user_func_array
0.0399
+0.0099
+33.02
InvokeCallUserFunc
0.0418
+0.0118
+39.17
directImplementation
0.0475
+0.0175
+58.28
Iterations: 100 000
Averaged over: 10
PHP 7.1.2 (cli) (built: Feb 14 2017 21:24:45)
Overall Average
Invocation
Time (s)
Delta (s)
%
directFunction
0.0043
-0.0096
-68.92
directStatic
0.0050
-0.0089
-64.04
directInstance
0.0058
-0.0081
-58.22
directLambda
0.0063
-0.0075
-54.44
directClosure
0.0081
-0.0058
-41.57
call_user_func
0.0139
call_user_func_array
0.0147
+0.0008
+5.84
Invoke
0.0187
+0.0048
+34.61
ClosureFactory
0.0207
+0.0069
+49.43
assignedClosureFactory
0.0219
+0.0080
+57.75
directImplementation
0.0232
+0.0094
+67.53
InvokeCallUserFunc
0.0264
+0.0126
+90.67