Re: on memory usage with the 64bit patch, and interpretation of various numbers
Pierre,
1) if you reduce size off all language entities to 32-bit, then what this
patch would provide except of extending string to have 64-bit length?
but you always talk - it's a side effect (I'm not talking about IS_LONG
part).
2) In phpng we use zend_string* for class, function and other names, so
extending zend_string would extend all of them anyway.
Thanks. Dmitry.
On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 9:30 AM, Pierre Joye <pierre.php@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 7:25 AM, Ulf Wendel <ulf.wendel@phpdoc.de> wrote:
>
> > Assuming unified behaviour is the #1 goal, the lowest common denominator
> > could be used instead of the largest. The latter obviously has
> > undesired side effects.
>
> Nice rhetoric but sadly missing some of the key points:
>
> - for class/variables and other language keywords, we can keep what we
> have (see my other replies for the reasons)
> - we can always limit the maximum size of a storage (hash, zval,
> buffer, etc) at the implementation
> . we already do that
> . it still gives us the benefits of using a clean, safe and
> standard implementation (see other replies for a more detailed
> explanation about these points)
> - the lower common denominator, platforms wild is what we do with this
> patch
>
> --
> Pierre
>
> @pierrejoye | http://www.libgd.org
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>
Thread (10 messages)