On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 10:46 AM, Ferenc Kovacs <tyra3l@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 10:39 AM, Lester Caine <lester@lsces.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 14/05/14 09:22, Ferenc Kovacs wrote:
>>
>>> Hopefully there is no plan to backport this to the PHP5 builds?
>>>
>>> both the phpng and the size_t rfcs are targetting the next major
>>> version, none of them are accepted yet, both of those would/will be
>>> suitable for 'home users'.
>>> buth these are all public information, stated in the RFCs and discussed
>>> on internals@ which you seems to be subscribed on based on your replies
>>> to the list, so I'm not sure where the confusion comes from.
>>>
>>
>> Since original discussions were being targeted against PHP5 picking out
>> where discussions have moved on is not easily obvious. I seem to recall
>> this was originally targeted against PHP5?
>>
>> Have we reached a point where PHP5 has been 'frozen' and so PHPNext is the
>> more detailed target today?
>>
>>
> I guess you are referring to the previous rfc of the size_t, which was
> targetting 5.6 and failed?
> https://wiki.php.net/rfc/size_t_and_int64
> many of the no voters mentioned that they would support the rfc but not in
> a minor version hence the authors accepted and now tried to get in into the
> next major, and here we are atm.
Excactly. And we would not have done it if we knew that Zend was
working on a total rewamp. We would have rather focused on getting
phpng done faster, from a usability, design point of view, while
adding the necessary steps for a safe, clean and actual 64bit support.
But we did not know, nobody knew it until last week. But now we are
asked to trash months of work, openness and tests. Sorry, no.
--
Pierre
@pierrejoye | http://www.libgd.org