Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:74355
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: error (pb1.pair.com: domain zend.com from 209.85.128.170 cause and error)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAEZPtU7Tacn2GS0REbikcn8XKQr04vve=LsGQJZrkUh2oHZsuA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAEZPtU4mrOiBzbqZdvxbgxseGo3ZzwgiinkqsgLQEZebrAke6w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+9eiLsMtcYVSvzHW_oc1dXNrDBH8RQ-cb1MgKB5ef2i2mQX7g@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAEZPtU7Tacn2GS0REbikcn8XKQr04vve=LsGQJZrkUh2oHZsuA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 19 May 2014 14:36:02 +0400
Message-ID: <CA+9eiLu8tgsitvZ0DUCqE8ahQPwE9rDhL9JVzQ5P6meVut4H_w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Pierre Joye <pierre.php@gmail.com>
Cc: Nikita Popov <nikita.ppv@gmail.com>, PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bd6c1fa6fa98104f9be542d
Subject: Re: 64bit and phpng, votes and plans
From: dmitry@zend.com (Dmitry Stogov)

--047d7bd6c1fa6fa98104f9be542d
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

yes.

Thanks. Dmitry.


On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 2:34 PM, Pierre Joye <pierre.php@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 12:11 PM, Dmitry Stogov <dmitry@zend.com> wrote:
> > Hi Pierre,
> >
> > I appreciate your professionalism in helping with phpng.
> >
> > I object against the proposal, because in my opinion, it makes
> significant
> > degradation even for master.
> > (Please don't argue about it again. You have your opinion, I have mine,
> we
> > already wrote a lot).
> >
> > I also think, it makes sense to target at least IS_LONG part of this
> patch
> > to phpng.
> >
> > Other changes are questionable. In phpng we may relatively easy check the
> > impact of 64-bit string size on performance and memory consumption to
> make a
> > decision. I don't have any special opinion right now.
> >
> > I didn't get your position about zend_size_t in all core structures. And
> > this is the main question.
>
> I think I was again not clear. This is the part we will drop. We
> simply can't do it now for the reasons I explained in the mail. But as
> I and Nikita said earlier there are areas for improvements and tweaks,
> only the right time to do it is debatable, I prefer to have a stable,
> testable branch before going to change these parts again with the risk
> of making the whole thing hard to test, debug or improve. Is it
> something you can live with?
>
> Cheers,
> --
> Pierre
>
> @pierrejoye | http://www.libgd.org
>

--047d7bd6c1fa6fa98104f9be542d--