Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:74391 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 27428 invoked from network); 20 May 2014 22:10:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 20 May 2014 22:10:03 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=ajf@ajf.me; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=ajf@ajf.me; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain ajf.me designates 198.187.29.240 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: ajf@ajf.me X-Host-Fingerprint: 198.187.29.240 imap2-1.ox.privateemail.com Received: from [198.187.29.240] ([198.187.29.240:57770] helo=imap2-1.ox.privateemail.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id C4/60-24198-9B2DB735 for ; Tue, 20 May 2014 18:10:02 -0400 Received: from [192.168.0.200] (unknown [90.203.28.11]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.privateemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AF8B95A009C; Tue, 20 May 2014 18:09:55 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.2\)) In-Reply-To: <537BD006.80405@lsces.co.uk> Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 23:09:51 +0100 Cc: internals@lists.php.net Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID: References: <537BC669.2030704@sugarcrm.com> <537BD006.80405@lsces.co.uk> To: Lester Caine X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.2) Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: 64bit and phpng, votes and plans From: ajf@ajf.me (Andrea Faulds) On 20 May 2014, at 22:58, Lester Caine wrote: >>> >Similar argument applies to string also. It would be WTF, when = users try to >>> >access string offset over 32bit values. Data dealt with PHP is = getting >>> >larger >>> >and larger. It would be an issue sooner or later. >> Not likely, unless somehow PHP becomes language of choice for = processing >> big data. Which I don't see exactly happening. But if it ever = happens, >> we can deal with it then. >=20 > It is here today and has been for many years now. While the number of = records may not be large, using large offsets can result in passing the = 32bit boundary and what was an integer flips ... Any app which deals with Twitter is dealing with large, 64-bit numbers. -- Andrea Faulds http://ajf.me/