Re: 64 bit RFC, #2 and #3 yes
From: Andrey Hristov Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2014 13:19:11 +0000 Subject: Re: 64 bit RFC, #2 and #3 yes References: 1 Groups: php.internals Request: Send a blank email to [email protected] to get a copy of this message
On 1.02.2014 14:30, Anatol Belski wrote:Hi, as the concerns on the BC breach by zpp and macros changes are huge, we've invented the below to make the essential change only visible. This branches have zpp and macros change reverted (like #2 and #3 had resulted yes), only the necessary 64 improvement is in place. PHP core, zpp and macros reverted to the state of mainstream https://github.com/weltling/php-src/tree/str_size_and_int64_old_names Diff of the branch with old names to master http://belski.net/phpz/str_size_and_int64_old_names.diff An extension ported and fully worky with 5.3/4/5 and str_size_and_int64 branch, diff https://github.com/weltling/phurple/compare/str_size_and_int64 The same ext how it looks now (not using the new zpp placeholders) https://github.com/weltling/phurple A sample extension generated with ext_skel from str_size_and_int64 branch with several usage examples, worky also wit h5.3/4/5 https://github.com/weltling/str_size_and_int64_example/blob/master/str_size_and_int64.c#L47 The sample ext diff to the current mainstream base https://github.com/weltling/str_size_and_int64_example/compare/str_size_and_int64_revert Were this an acceptable tradeoff for this RFC to make it, one could still decide it in favor of 5.6. The worries and wishes are not reasonless, which is clear. However I think to strike a compromise is important to keep balance. Regards AnatolI saw 2 problems with the patch, in mysqlnd. After 2 instances I stopped reading but a parameter of type uint is being declared as php_int_t, a flag variable. Andrey
Thread (7 messages)
| « previous | php.internals (#72197) | next » |
|---|