On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 12:11 PM, Dmitry Stogov <dmitry@zend.com> wrote:
> Hi Pierre,
>
> I appreciate your professionalism in helping with phpng.
>
> I object against the proposal, because in my opinion, it makes significant
> degradation even for master.
> (Please don't argue about it again. You have your opinion, I have mine, we
> already wrote a lot).
>
> I also think, it makes sense to target at least IS_LONG part of this patch
> to phpng.
>
> Other changes are questionable. In phpng we may relatively easy check the
> impact of 64-bit string size on performance and memory consumption to make a
> decision. I don't have any special opinion right now.
>
> I didn't get your position about zend_size_t in all core structures. And
> this is the main question.
I think I was again not clear. This is the part we will drop. We
simply can't do it now for the reasons I explained in the mail. But as
I and Nikita said earlier there are areas for improvements and tweaks,
only the right time to do it is debatable, I prefer to have a stable,
testable branch before going to change these parts again with the risk
of making the whole thing hard to test, debug or improve. Is it
something you can live with?
Cheers,
--
Pierre
@pierrejoye | http://www.libgd.org