On Aug 25, 2014 1:14 PM, "Dmitry Stogov" <dmi...@zend.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 2:59 PM, Pierre Joye <pierre....@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Aug 25, 2014 12:56 PM, "Dmitry Stogov" <dmi...@zend.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 2:45 PM, Pierre Joye <pierre....@gmail.com>
wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Aug 25, 2014 9:22 AM, "Dmitry Stogov" <dmi...@zend.com> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > Hi Pierre,
>> >> >
>> >> > I'm glad, you agree to rename IS_INT back to IS_LONG.
>> >> >
>> >> > zend_long and size_t usage looks fine.
>> >> >
>> >> > I see no problems changing zend_string related API and related
macros introduced in NG. They are new for everyone.
>> >> > I hope, the changes won't make API less clear or useful (so it
would be great to review them).
>> >> >
>> >> > I don't see a big reason to rename "zend_uint" into "uint32_t", but
it's just my own opinion. I would prefer keep it as is, or at worse case
rename into "zend_uint32" or "uint32". Anyway, I'll agree with majority.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> uint32_t :)
>> >
>> > 3 people are not the majority (or may be I missed discussion on IRC).
>> > It's better to think before changing something in many places without
a real reason.
>>
>> Why do we need it when the standard type exists and does exactly what we
want? Same for size_t. It is mostly contained in the engine, no other
impact and avoid yet another type definition for existing standard type (we
have php_stdint.h to make them always available).
>
> We never had zend_size_t before and used size_t.
> but we had zend_uint for ages and changing it to new name in thousand
places won't make a lot of sense.
> If you like to make it always be a 32-bit number, just change the
definition.
> If you are going to rename zend_uint, should we expect renaming of all
the similar zend_* types from zend_types.h?
>
> typedef unsigned char zend_bool;
> typedef unsigned char zend_uchar;
> typedef unsigned int zend_uint;
> typedef unsigned long zend_ulong;
> typedef unsigned short zend_ushort;

That would be a very good thing IMHO. These types exist because of the lack
of stdint. Now that we have it it could be easier to use them when we can.

Nikita?

Reply via email to