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 > >