On 2023/02/09 16:29, Rowan Tommins <rowan.coll...@gmail.com> wrote:
> This is where I'm suggesting you assume good faith: what looks like a
> "secret revert" probably feels like something entirely different to Derick.

Timeline:

- Jan 13 11:34 AM: PR https://github.com/derickr/timelib/pull/141/files

- Jan 18 4:34 PM: PR was locked

- Jan 19 7:49 PM: commit
  https://github.com/php/php-src/commit/0df92d218e88a0 pushed to
  php-src

Look how the commit is exactly a revert of the timelib PR that Derick
Rethans closed and locked just the day before.

I'm open to hearing Derick's side of the story.

> OK, that seems clear. As far as I can see, this is the first time on this
> thread or either of the PR threads that you've actually explained that
> violation.

I explained it already:

 https://github.com/derickr/timelib/pull/141#issuecomment-1386800720

> OK, so follow-up question: what gives you confidence that the change is
> *safe*? Sometimes, technical violations of a spec are necessary for the
> practical realities of the situation.

This piece of code was written when these types were not yet in the C
standard (the C standard used by PHP at the time); but the code became
wrong as soon as PHP switched to C99.

So it's not like somebody decided "we need to violate the spec for
some practical reality"; that spec didn't apply at the time.

What my code change does is adjust PHP to the newly adopted C
standard; this should have been part of PHP's C99 transition, but was
probably forgotten.

Max

-- 
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: https://www.php.net/unsub.php

Reply via email to