Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:76815 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 3926 invoked from network); 22 Aug 2014 15:33:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 22 Aug 2014 15:33:01 -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] ([192.64.116.200:45868] helo=imap1-2.ox.privateemail.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id CA/34-13566-AA267F35 for ; Fri, 22 Aug 2014 11:33:00 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.privateemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92DD2B0008A; Fri, 22 Aug 2014 11:32:55 -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 TUqOq5cYzyZb; Fri, 22 Aug 2014 11:32:55 -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 1A6D1B000A7; Fri, 22 Aug 2014 11:32:53 -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: Fri, 22 Aug 2014 16:32:51 +0100 Cc: PHP internals Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID: References: To: Nikita Popov X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6) Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Better type names for int64 RFC From: ajf@ajf.me (Andrea Faulds) On 22 Aug 2014, at 12:16, Nikita Popov wrote: > As we were not given a chance to resolve this issue before the merge, = a > short proposal has been created, which aims to revert all unnecessary > naming changes and instead use type names that are consistent with the > existing code base and expectations: >=20 > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/better_type_names_for_int64 >=20 > Due to the unexpected merge on short notice, with no chance for = discussion, > this issue is blocking a number of other patches. As such I ask if we = can > move through this RFC with a shortened cycle. I would not appreciate = having > to wait three weeks to have a workable codebase again. I=92m very much in favour of this RFC. It is not necessary to change the = type names after all; if people turn on compiler warnings, they=92ll = find out what=92s broken anyway. -- Andrea Faulds http://ajf.me/