The forums ran from 2008-2020 and are now closed and viewable here as an archive.

Home Forums Other PHP Include vs CodeKit Include: significant performance benefit?

  • This topic is empty.
Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
  • Author
  • #152263
    Michael Sheaver

    I am setting up a new website which will consist (at least initially) of mostly static pages. Being a programmer and software engineer by training, I am very keen on making my code as modular as possible. I have placed the HTML for each section of the page into separate files, such as header, nav, sidebar, main-content, footer, etc. I had planned to use the PHP include statement to bring all of these elements together on page load-up. However, I recently discovered that CodeKit has the ability to use @includes to generate the complete HTML file at compile time, thus eliminating the need for multiple server-side PHP calls.

    I have several questions that I would like to pose regarding this: 1. Would the CokeKit approach make a big difference in page download performance, or is the time saving negligible? 2. Are there other tried-and-tested ways of keeping the HTML code modular? 3. If I were to use the CodeKit approach, is there a non-PHP way to do this: © 2012-<?php echo date(‘Y’); I bring these questions here in the hopes of tapping into the great wisdom of others who may have dealt with this kind of stuff.


    Hi Michael,

    Codekit outputs to one flat html file which will always be faster when running on the server – although a user would probably never notice the difference.

    I’m one of the developers on and we use Liquid templating to keep projects modular – I would highly recommend this approach (but I would of course!)

    The date problem can be easily solved with Liquid – check out the date section in our docs: (see Output / The date filter section)


Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
  • The forum ‘Other’ is closed to new topics and replies.