Re: Re: [RFC] Add pack()/unpack() support for signed integers with specific endianness
On 03/11/2025 18:33, Rob Landers wrote:
> Please don’t do this.
>
> For those of us using pack()/unpack(), I don’t really care how much like or unlike Perl it
> is, and having to switch strings based on php version because someone wanted it like Perl sounds
> like a special kind of hell. It’s already tricky enough to get pack/unpack right when dealing with
> binary data and having to do it twice plus maintain two different versions of the same string… no
> thank you.
AFAIU the old way of doing things won't break with Tim's suggestion. So there's no
need to switch strings.
It just adds the possibility of using <>.
I agree it's already tricky enough to get things right, which is _exactly_ why Tim's
approach is the right one. Instead of adding more arbitrarily chosen letters we now have a more
meaningful way to indicate endianness. It also is proven by Tim's patch that this isn't
hard to achieve. While implementation-wise adding some more letters is easier, Tim's patch
isn't really difficult anyway.
I will vote against the RFC in its current form in favor of Tim's approach.
Kind regards
Niels
Thread (33 messages)