Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:57096 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 62736 invoked from network); 26 Dec 2011 00:33:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 26 Dec 2011 00:33:53 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=smalyshev@sugarcrm.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=smalyshev@sugarcrm.com; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain sugarcrm.com designates 67.192.241.113 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 67.192.241.113 smtp113.dfw.emailsrvr.com Linux 2.6 Received: from [67.192.241.113] ([67.192.241.113:50155] helo=smtp113.dfw.emailsrvr.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 29/90-55501-0F0C7FE4 for ; Sun, 25 Dec 2011 19:33:53 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp11.relay.dfw1a.emailsrvr.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id B770AD0385; Sun, 25 Dec 2011 19:33:49 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: OK Received: by smtp11.relay.dfw1a.emailsrvr.com (Authenticated sender: smalyshev-AT-sugarcrm.com) with ESMTPSA id 703B6D0383; Sun, 25 Dec 2011 19:33:49 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <4EF7C0EC.8070807@sugarcrm.com> Date: Sun, 25 Dec 2011 16:33:48 -0800 Organization: SugarCRM User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:8.0) Gecko/20111105 Thunderbird/8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: PHP Internals , Derick Rethans Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: bug 52062 From: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com (Stas Malyshev) Hi! I see that test for bug 52062 (marked as fixed by this commit: http://svn.php.net/viewvc/?view=revision&revision=320481) now fails on my 32-bit system. Looking at the patch and the test, it can not actually succeed, as the test expects this: int(100000000000) which is not possible on 32-bit system, and the code actually compares the result to LONG_MAX which is 32-bit and returns false when it's bigger that that. So I'd like to know what was the intent there: 1. Return false on 32-bit and the test should be fixed to account for 32-bit and 64-bit? 2. Return float on 32-bit? 3. Do something else? Please advise. -- Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ (408)454-6900 ext. 227