Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:76782 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 31826 invoked from network); 21 Aug 2014 20:52:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 21 Aug 2014 20:52:35 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=ajf@ajf.me; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=ajf@ajf.me; spf=pass; 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] ([192.64.116.207:37551] helo=imap2-2.ox.privateemail.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 47/D1-22336-21C56F35 for ; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 16:52:35 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.privateemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 914A38C0080; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 16:52:31 -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 py7MCUFiGAO0; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 16:52:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [192.168.0.2] (05439dda.skybroadband.com [5.67.157.218]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.privateemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 09F1A8C007B; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 16:52:27 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\)) In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2014 21:52:24 +0100 Cc: Dmitry Stogov , PHP Internals , Pierre Joye , Anatol Belski Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID: <2EC7A930-02E3-4C2E-8A6C-87A4A77297A7@ajf.me> References: To: Nikita Popov X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6) Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] 64-bit integers and 64-bit string length patch is ready to be merged From: ajf@ajf.me (Andrea Faulds) On 21 Aug 2014, at 21:49, Nikita Popov wrote: > I am also concerned that we now have zend_uint_t (a 64-bit integer = type) > and zend_uint (a 32-bit integer type). Notice the difference? Yes, = it's the > missing _t. >=20 > I would appreciate it if we could consider the following naming = convention: >=20 > * zend_(u)int - 32 bit integer type > * zend_(u)long - 64 bit integer type (on 64 bit systems) >=20 > This retains the original meaning of the type, with the tweak that > zend_(u)long will be 64bit on LLP64 systems as well. This avoids the > confusion of having two types that only differ by a _t suffix and have > totally different meanings. It also removes any need to rename = everything > from LONG to INT. I was wondering if zend_uint was still 32-bit like I thought it was. I = guess I mistook zend_uint_t for zend_uint, which backs up your = (implied?) point about confusion. Your proposal sounds like a great idea, I=92d be very in favour of this. -- Andrea Faulds http://ajf.me/