On Wed, Oct 06, 2004 at 08:56:15AM -0400, Noah Botimer wrote: > Joe, > > This may be crazy, but does it make sense to think of integers in a more > defined manner? That is, ``integer'' being equivalent to a long, which > does have a guarantee on size (32-bit)? Also, some kind of long long > type for 64-bit support would have to be included. I mean, consistency > is something I value... Does it make sense to just be pragmatic and > switch over to defined/guaranteed sizes/behavior, rather than hoping and > bailing out under the ``platform-defined'' clause? Is this at all > applicable?
Storing large integers in a long long rather than a double would be a big change to Zend, I expect, and it really doesn't avoid the issue that you still have to decide on a behaviour when a large integer is cast down to a long. Converting a long long > LONG_MAX to a long is still not defined behaviour in C99 (it's an "implementation-defined behaviour or an implementation-defined signal" case) joe -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
