Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:76790 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 98837 invoked from network); 22 Aug 2014 07:10:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 22 Aug 2014 07:10:19 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=php@beccati.com; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=php@beccati.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain beccati.com designates 176.9.114.167 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: php@beccati.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 176.9.114.167 spritz.beccati.com Received: from [176.9.114.167] ([176.9.114.167:45118] helo=mail.beccati.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 16/A2-15848-6DCE6F35 for ; Fri, 22 Aug 2014 03:10:17 -0400 Received: (qmail 14229 invoked from network); 22 Aug 2014 07:10:08 -0000 Received: from home.beccati.com (HELO ?192.168.1.202?) (88.149.176.119) by mail.beccati.com with SMTP; 22 Aug 2014 07:10:08 -0000 Message-ID: <53F6ECC9.8040200@beccati.com> Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2014 09:10:01 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrea Faulds , Dmitry Stogov CC: PHP Internals , Pierre Joye , Anatol Belski References: <6E03BE65-260C-4B94-9587-C785FBC112C2@ajf.me> In-Reply-To: <6E03BE65-260C-4B94-9587-C785FBC112C2@ajf.me> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] 64-bit integers and 64-bit string length patch is ready to be merged From: php@beccati.com (Matteo Beccati) On 21/08/2014 19:42, Andrea Faulds wrote: > * IS_LONG/long - 32-bit or 64-bit integer (machine-dependant) > * IS_BIGINT/bigint - arbitrary-size integer > * IS_BIGINT_OR_LONG/integer - either a long or a bigint (pseudo-type) > > Replacing IS_LONG with IS_INT kinda ruins my naming scheme. The intention is that “integer” and “int” are synonyms for “long or bigint”. However, if internally an int is one thing and to userland it’s another, that would be problematic. If this goes through, I’d probably make my bigints patch rename IS_INT to something new again, probably IS_SMALLINT or even back to IS_LONG. wouldn't the following work for you? * IS_INT * IS_BIGINT * IS_INT_OR_BIGINT After all, SQL has INT(EGER) and BIGINT, albeit with different meanings. In fact "bigint" itself to me and possibly many other developers means a 64bit int, not a GMP int. Cheers -- Matteo Beccati Development & Consulting - http://www.beccati.com/