Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:81729 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 37726 invoked from network); 3 Feb 2015 16:44:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 3 Feb 2015 16:44:39 -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 192.64.116.208 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: ajf@ajf.me X-Host-Fingerprint: 192.64.116.208 imap2-3.ox.privateemail.com Received: from [192.64.116.208] ([192.64.116.208:59731] helo=imap2-3.ox.privateemail.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 52/54-20608-6FAF0D45 for ; Tue, 03 Feb 2015 11:44:38 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.privateemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 013378C0080; Tue, 3 Feb 2015 11:44:36 -0500 (EST) 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 hXqH6XH155n6; Tue, 3 Feb 2015 11:44:35 -0500 (EST) Received: from oa-res-26-240.wireless.abdn.ac.uk (oa-res-26-240.wireless.abdn.ac.uk [137.50.26.240]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.privateemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3792C8C007D; Tue, 3 Feb 2015 11:44:34 -0500 (EST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2070.6\)) In-Reply-To: <54D0DFE5.9030602@lsces.co.uk> Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2015 16:44:32 +0000 Cc: internals@lists.php.net Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID: <06F175EB-D44A-445F-8015-8421C7C12F39@ajf.me> References: <8C47FA53-0964-49C0-963C-332A936348A5@ajf.me> <54D00C40.8060907@lsces.co.uk> <54C5DC93-9600-4EE2-BF06-7BF10FC6AD5C@ajf.me> <54D08D50.5050407@lsces.co.uk> <1C2ED70C-72A0-4513-A134-5DAE4CCA5B3D@ajf.me> <54D0DFE5.9030602@lsces.co.uk> To: Lester Caine X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2070.6) Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Big Integer Support From: ajf@ajf.me (Andrea Faulds) > On 3 Feb 2015, at 14:49, Lester Caine wrote: >=20 > On 03/02/15 14:03, Andrea Faulds wrote: >> But I don=92t consider 0.25MB extra to be such a problem in practice. = The PHP binary is already huge, and every system running PHP will have = ample memory. >=20 > Yes one approach is 'computers are getting faster with lots of memory' > ... and for servers this is not a problem ... they will more than > likely be 64bit anyway! But for smaller embedded devices php *IS* > becoming an option so I don't have to program in C or something else, > and then we look to strip everything that does not need to be present. Sure, but I don=92t think we shouldn=92t cripple the language merely for = the sake of really low-end embedded devices. Also, I=92m not convinced = that the overhead, at least in terms of file size, is really that big of = an issue. Just for you, I=92ve gone and compiled the bigint branch (with = LibTomMath) and master on my machine: $ ls -l php7-* -rwxr-xr-x 1 ajf staff 6400408 3 Feb 16:39 php7-bigint -rwxr-xr-x 1 ajf staff 6248920 3 Feb 16:42 php7-master The difference is a mere 151488 B, or 151 KB. Is that really so bad? -- Andrea Faulds http://ajf.me/