Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:75535 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 54918 invoked from network); 15 Jul 2014 12:15:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 15 Jul 2014 12:15:53 -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 192.64.116.200 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: ajf@ajf.me X-Host-Fingerprint: 192.64.116.200 imap1-2.ox.privateemail.com Received: from [192.64.116.200] ([192.64.116.200:40534] helo=imap1-2.ox.privateemail.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id A5/2B-15121-87B15C35 for ; Tue, 15 Jul 2014 08:15:52 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.privateemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D0C0B00085; Tue, 15 Jul 2014 08:15:49 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at imap1.ox.privateemail.com Received: from mail.privateemail.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (imap1.ox.privateemail.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 3V9sV6yah0FJ; Tue, 15 Jul 2014 08:15:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [192.168.0.15] (unknown [90.210.122.167]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.privateemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 59D5DB00081; Tue, 15 Jul 2014 08:15:47 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\)) In-Reply-To: <53C4D2E7.9050706@lsces.co.uk> Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2014 13:15:45 +0100 Cc: internals@lists.php.net Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID: References: <7646A8D1-69A2-4255-B048-D3B9F28B422F@ajf.me> <53C47CA2.4050306@sugarcrm.com> <714C2E5E-A321-4993-9CFB-F7DFAC45C532@ajf.me> <53C4B955.5060401@sugarcrm.com> <53C4D2E7.9050706@lsces.co.uk> To: Lester Caine X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6) Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] intdiv() From: ajf@ajf.me (Andrea Faulds) On 15 Jul 2014, at 08:06, Lester Caine wrote: > Taking this in isolation is wrong ... > It is essentially linked up with all of the discussion on '64bit' > processing. What seems to be ignored so far is the simple 'bigint' > value. Limiting 32 bit systems to only support 32 bit integers may be > the easy solution, but bigint is an essential element of most database > type sets these days, so should be supported transparently. If a = primary > key is provided as part of a database result set, then do we really = want > the situation where some installs fall over with an overflow of that = key > on 32 bit systems? Having to use a secondary level function = exclusively > simply because the core processing gets it wrong is another mistake? >=20 > Certainly it's not going to be easy to handle, and may not even be > practical? But even the discussion on 'type hinting' seems to ignore = the > range problem where a 64bit value may be required but the installation > on4y supports 32bit integers. Currently the value simply works with = the > string version =85 Yeah, hence why I=92m also proposing the bigint RFC, which intdiv() = would work nicely with. -- Andrea Faulds http://ajf.me/