Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:76842
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 209.85.192.42 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <53F8C3F2.1090009@lerdorf.com>
References: <CAF+90c_AMJ3SLyX7eDQq-gwFLOCQUfLus+qFfJgAgTzBpZpfEg@mail.gmail.com>
	<D19D208D-06E9-4310-92DD-6F02C666138C@ajf.me>
	<CAEZPtU7yMbMSoB2imCH8NX7nCwXttpnf878vJeBK2UypJ_QxVQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<53F7F6ED.1050609@lerdorf.com>
	<CAEZPtU5+UYNJcuAnQ+ZS-U4POweEj_J=XMiP8t4zeo7jbZ_15A@mail.gmail.com>
	<53F82F16.3030601@lerdorf.com>
	<CAEZPtU7dJrZPb52u0tK9BNp6U2bP1D7wCzOw_3pDiqggd+Y2hA@mail.gmail.com>
	<53F832F0.7010601@lerdorf.com>
	<CAEZPtU4wuumiq-wo8N8FZmMwAPU+K6=Q9jQo8icLjTqfkSCZBw@mail.gmail.com>
	<53F8C3F2.1090009@lerdorf.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2014 21:10:42 +0200
Message-ID: <CAEZPtU5fcwWq1-xtq55xTX6URqG-Tq=z11fv2ytH7CXT4HveSw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Rasmus Lerdorf <rasmus@lerdorf.com>
Cc: PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Better type names for int64 RFC
From: pierre.php@gmail.com (Pierre Joye)

On Sat, Aug 23, 2014 at 6:40 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf <rasmus@lerdorf.com> wrote:
> On 8/22/14, 11:25 PM, Pierre Joye wrote:
>> There is. Long is not used anymore. So we can argue about that but
>> there is a change and it should be reflected imo.
>>
>> You still totally ignore any of my other points, which are even more
>> important in regard to maintaining one code tree for 5.x and 7.x,
>> which is very likely not possible in a sane way for many extensions.
>
> I ignored it because it is irrelevant.

These points are not irrelevant:

- zend_uint should go away, uint32_t should be used instead
- zend_int_t could remain. it matches the respective, architecture
specific int32_t
  and int64_t being used behind it. _t standing for _typed just like
in the standard
  types intXX_t

And we can add:

- zend_size_t can be dropped in favor of size_t

And dangerous APIs signature changes are not irrelevant either. And
many of them are not related to performance at all but a choice made
at the implementation time. So the solid technical reason you mention
later does not apply here.

On the same area, I would also prefer not to use STR_* defines but
directly called zend_string_*, it will drastically reduce errors
during porting or later.

> The fact that many related things
> are changing does not justify piling on more changes.

RIght.

>  Every change
> should have a very solid technical reason behind it. "Long is not used
> anymore" is not a solid technical reason.

Consistent APIs, in my book, is a solid technical reason.

> The code will compile
> perfectly fine with it being IS_LONG. Also, these are userspace-facing
> in the sense that as an extension author we are dealing with PHP's type
> system consisting of lval, dval, string, array, object and resource. How
> exactly an lval or IS_LONG is implemented at the C level on any given
> platform is an implementation detail and could change, but we are still
> providing an lval to userspace.

Extensions write should not use the zend_value member directly but use
the provided APIs or macros, which is called Z_IVAL btw. Want to
change to Z_LVAL? WIll be more consistent.

> As C developers, extension authors are
> more than capable of checking the actual macro definition if they want
> to know the details.

I have not doubt about the capabilities of the extension developers,
but improving APIs quality reduces the # of errors.

> I'd also appreciate if you would drop your toxicity level a few notches
> in your emails to the list, irc and twitter.

I do not agree with your definition, but as long as there are double
standards and related behaviors, I do not see how things can improve.
The way this RFC has been handled is a shame. If NG would have got as
much code reviews, got blocked twice while being accepted, etc. I do
not think Dmitry or Laruence would be that happy at this point. And
seriously, this is a pretty bad behavior. It is also not the 1st time
it happens. Only difference is that I do not care much when something
happens, I know each of you long enough, but other simply left.
Anyway, it does not help anyone to argue about that over and over, I
can agree with you on that.

Cheers,
-- 
Pierre

@pierrejoye | http://www.libgd.org