Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:76835
Return-Path: <pierre.php@gmail.com>
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net
Received: (qmail 80593 invoked from network); 23 Aug 2014 10:16:12 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1)
  by localhost with SMTP; 23 Aug 2014 10:16:12 -0000
Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=pierre.php@gmail.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass
Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=pierre.php@gmail.com; sender-id=pass
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.192.52 as permitted sender)
X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: pierre.php@gmail.com
X-Host-Fingerprint: 209.85.192.52 mail-qg0-f52.google.com  
Received: from [209.85.192.52] ([209.85.192.52:64566] helo=mail-qg0-f52.google.com)
	by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP
	id 17/B0-10566-BE968F35 for <internals@lists.php.net>; Sat, 23 Aug 2014 06:16:11 -0400
Received: by mail-qg0-f52.google.com with SMTP id f51so11023761qge.25
        for <internals@lists.php.net>; Sat, 23 Aug 2014 03:16:08 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :cc:content-type;
        bh=iYielLuTqj9uqrTrUOWwOE6dyhM8iNPQeBHLcXz3wto=;
        b=FOVOcnjJ02WxSQAxAV3yna/sVwlS5y74KzVkB4zN8OwcImFl3yE70aHRdP4aF6TYKa
         Wpa4rWC9WVeor1Bk0QwUOIiZByYGdq0bMylyvTc6kDn3O5Vue9P5qTuyRVAePF/dLjKb
         aTJRlL4xDZVtnAHcjFjjOwlWiyVINY34NzGMF0vJ4Il2CZZ/G6ti8XPhyqSOboyOwMiX
         IaOc+6k8fR4bablLthqIXXhMH2pHc03O4uggbmJDO3DD3lZlpGACBBvoDQ1+4WFnp72/
         E0Slua8UsnQZ1+FAu5eCZAUaQy+Mf9t5UNG36Cl+485D5vRK4WyF1qOqV/fGMl29qfxv
         dZQg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.140.85.135 with SMTP id n7mr14836782qgd.22.1408788968549;
 Sat, 23 Aug 2014 03:16:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.140.95.146 with HTTP; Sat, 23 Aug 2014 03:16:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.140.95.146 with HTTP; Sat, 23 Aug 2014 03:16:08 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CA+9eiLsvFG1M7ngzEF+071mi0bKnqObSu9J71v6fjDYEyWNbeg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAF+90c_AMJ3SLyX7eDQq-gwFLOCQUfLus+qFfJgAgTzBpZpfEg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+9eiLsvFG1M7ngzEF+071mi0bKnqObSu9J71v6fjDYEyWNbeg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2014 12:16:08 +0200
Message-ID: <CAEZPtU6ABAXz8ZmSDS=GfuhquA7iUASdpzAZdukf3n174qLQmg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Dmitry Stogov <dmitry@zend.com>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>, Nikita Popov <nikita.ppv@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c1271e08b48b0501493eb5
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Better type names for int64 RFC
From: pierre.php@gmail.com (Pierre Joye)

--001a11c1271e08b48b0501493eb5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Aug 23, 2014 11:55 AM, "Dmitry Stogov" <dmitry@zend.com> wrote:
>
> 100% agree with RFC.
> It would be great if technical improvements wouldn't be messed with this
> renaming :(

You realize that 80%+ of the zval macros has to be changed as well right?
And not only the name but the argument and their content.

I won't battle for this naming, but seriously the arguments listed on this
thread are amusing...

Cheers,
Pierre

--001a11c1271e08b48b0501493eb5--