Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:71796
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.216.47 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <52EA738D.5060600@lerdorf.com>
References: <CAEZPtU6749gD2a9BDzdTQoBPUsPDSspjukZvFw9qwt=Le5Q1zQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAGa2bXbfO-x9kMkC6UWujJbzVZrRdQ_N=PsZchGtXjGnxXRFKg@mail.gmail.com>
	<52E8C097.6080208@lsces.co.uk>
	<CADq_CxrS1xmcZN7Bstg3uXnQAtj3-sOo+qVX64V_ZEaZOZqDnw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAEp07h_J47OVJv5uGntbabjcsK91LxCRA3=U205nSszf-7vgsg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CALtuQzB9_EX+F5iv_uQLXzxSbBsHQBPic6HCj_y+y109rkijVw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAL0xaBFa4-+mMLAHi65d+X+qx3iQOn7Efq5rBOcuGiw_+Tmtqg@mail.gmail.com>
	<52EA738D.5060600@lerdorf.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2014 17:59:26 +0200
Message-ID: <CAL0xaBE0uWRvWsX06in7V-dSoKhZthSAmn+BbF+zO1B_3ZQL9A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Rasmus Lerdorf <rasmus@lerdorf.com>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c1236a52a4cc04f1322435
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] some thoughts about php 6
From: arvids.godjuks@gmail.com (Arvids Godjuks)

--001a11c1236a52a4cc04f1322435
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

30 =D1=8F=D0=BD=D0=B2. 2014 =D0=B3. 17:45 =D0=BF=D0=BE=D0=BB=D1=8C=D0=B7=D0=
=BE=D0=B2=D0=B0=D1=82=D0=B5=D0=BB=D1=8C "Rasmus Lerdorf" <rasmus@lerdorf.co=
m>
=D0=BD=D0=B0=D0=BF=D0=B8=D1=81=D0=B0=D0=BB:
>
> On 1/30/14, 2:26 AM, Arvids Godjuks wrote:
> > So, I say you go with the 64 bit improvements for 5.6, set all the
things
> > in motion, do the porting docs and make a hell lot of noise about this.
I'm
> > willing to help with the information campaign, because this lack of
proper
> > 64 bit support has gave me a few "WTF?!" situations when I had to figur=
e
> > out why things do not work and realize it's due to the 64 vs 32 bit
issues.
>
> You make it sound like 64-bit vs. 32-bit issues will go away with this
> patch. If you are writing portable code that should run the same
> everywhere you still have to worry about it. This change does not
> suddenly give you 64-bit integers on a 32-bit platform. The main thing
> this does is it makes 64-bit Windows no longer look like a 32-bit
> platform. Other true 32-bit platforms remain 32-bit. It also makes it
> possible to have >2g strings on 64-bit platforms, but this is hopefully
> a rather rare requirement. Imagine running that code on a server with
> MaxClients set to 50...
>
> I am all for this change, but I still think it is too big of an API
> break for a point release.
>
> -Rasmus
>

I've hit exactly the 32 bit ints on 64 bit windows. I know that 32 bit os
is 32, but i don't use those period for ages (due to some spesific stuff i
need big 64 ints).

Arvids.

--001a11c1236a52a4cc04f1322435--