Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:75958 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 41688 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2014 13:16:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 23 Jul 2014 13:16:50 -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 192.64.116.207 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: ajf@ajf.me X-Host-Fingerprint: 192.64.116.207 imap2-2.ox.privateemail.com Received: from [192.64.116.207] ([192.64.116.207:34231] helo=imap2-2.ox.privateemail.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id DD/1C-21666-0C5BFC35 for ; Wed, 23 Jul 2014 09:16:49 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.privateemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E244C8C007B; Wed, 23 Jul 2014 09:16:47 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at imap2.ox.privateemail.com Received: from mail.privateemail.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (imap2.ox.privateemail.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id nM-xxAakES7P; Wed, 23 Jul 2014 09:16:47 -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 7FE6D8C0075; Wed, 23 Jul 2014 09:16:45 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\)) In-Reply-To: <53CF771B.2080603@lsces.co.uk> Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2014 14:16:42 +0100 Cc: "internals@lists.php.net >> PHP internals" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID: References: <53CF6C1A.1020208@lsces.co.uk> <53CF771B.2080603@lsces.co.uk> To: Lester Caine X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6) Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] phpng - loss of IS_BOOL From: ajf@ajf.me (Andrea Faulds) On 23 Jul 2014, at 09:49, Lester Caine wrote: > I'm looking for the explanation as to why it HAS to change rather than > anything else. I can see that using the 64bit value field is overkill, > but there is still plenty of spare space in the TYPE element to not = have > to create an extra object type? The two types of boolean just need a > different type_flags entry? >=20 > THEN is_false and is_true make sense as macro's of is_bool =85 Arguably nothing *has* to change, but this change makes sense. TRUE and = FALSE are special values much like NULL, and there=92s no real good = reason not to have them be their own types like NULL is, given the = performance benefits and how it makes some types of code easier to write = or less error-prone. -- Andrea Faulds http://ajf.me/