Hello,
Is there any benchmarks or any comparison cases between SpîderMonkey
and the PH7 Embedded PHP Engine (http://ph7.symisc.net) which compiles
PHP scripts to bytecodes programs before execution.
I need an embeddable scripting engine to add a dynamic web interfaces
to my C/C++ application and I hesitate between JavaScript
(SpiderMonkey) and PHP (PH7 Engine).
Thanks.

I don't know of anything, but it wouldn't be too hard to take a few SunSpider benchmarks, port them to PHP, and see what happens.

Dave

On 11/08/2012 05:40 PM, Mrad Chems Eddine wrote:

If it only compiles to bytecode, then I would guess it's substantially
slower than SpiderMonkey or any of the other main JS engines. All the JS
engines use a JIT and varying levels of optimization. SpiderMonkey
compiles to bytecode for its "fast compile, slow execution" interpreter
and only JITs stuff that executes frequently; other engines go straight
to JITted code of some sort (using different optimization settings to
control startup speed vs execution speed.)

I'm not sure what "dynamic web interfaces" means. Embedding a scripting
language engine like SpiderMonkey doesn't give you much web stuff.

I would guess that PH7 would be easier to embed than SpiderMonkey, but
SpiderMonkey would be faster. Honestly, V8 might be your best option --
basically the same speed as SpiderMonkey, but easier to embed. How its
embeddability compares to PH7, I've no clue.

On 11/08/2012 05:40 PM, Mrad Chems Eddine wrote:

If it only compiles to bytecode, then I would guess it's substantially
slower than SpiderMonkey or any of the other main JS engines. All the JS
engines use a JIT and varying levels of optimization. SpiderMonkey
compiles to bytecode for its "fast compile, slow execution" interpreter
and only JITs stuff that executes frequently; other engines go straight
to JITted code of some sort (using different optimization settings to
control startup speed vs execution speed.)

I'm not sure what "dynamic web interfaces" means. Embedding a scripting
language engine like SpiderMonkey doesn't give you much web stuff.

I would guess that PH7 would be easier to embed than SpiderMonkey, but
SpiderMonkey would be faster. Honestly, V8 might be your best option --
basically the same speed as SpiderMonkey, but easier to embed. How its
embeddability compares to PH7, I've no clue.

I have wriiten a c++ wrapper which "

http://code.google.com/p/libjspp/

libjspp allows easy interfacing & interacting of C++ with javascript spidermonkey
Non intrusive to C++ & javascript world at same time.
Useful for applications which want to Embed & Extend Javascript in object oriented manner.
Very thin interface virtually no overhead by using C++ templates.
App can create multiple javascript engines per process or per thread and export native functions , class, variables to selected engines
Multi threaded – support for engine per thread.
dynamically define cached & non cached property.
Caching of properties defined in native & anonymous object allow direct local access without need of conversions between javascript & native.
Caching of strings avoids trivial & frequents memory allocations.
Memory allocation are extern to javascript smartly managed by library
Javascript world is agnoustic to the fact that javascript class / object was by created and managed via C++
Exported C++ class objects are agnoustic to fact that they are proxy to Javascript class / object.