Rowan Collins wrote:
> The point is that writing code in PHP and assuming integers will
> overflow after 32 bits has been a bad idea for a long time, outside of
> really unusual cases like COM integration [1], where there's a valid
> reason to assume you'll never want to run it on Linux.
I fully
Lester Caine wrote on 05/02/2015 16:49:
On 05/02/15 16:24, Rowan Collins wrote:
The simple answer here is that there is not a 'single' definition of
integer ...
True. But the definition of "integer" in PHP is, and has been for many
years, "as big as this build can handle". With Andrea's patch,
On 05/02/15 16:24, Rowan Collins wrote:
>> The simple answer here is that there is not a 'single' definition of
>> integer ...
>
> True. But the definition of "integer" in PHP is, and has been for many
> years, "as big as this build can handle". With Andrea's patch, all
> systems can handle really
Lester Caine wrote on 05/02/2015 14:51:
On 05/02/15 14:24, Rowan Collins wrote:
There is nothing new about PHP's userland int type being 64-bit on
64-bit platforms. For instance, raising 2 to the power of 62 returns
exactly the same thing on every version of PHP back to 4.3.0:
http://3v4l.org/VB
Christoph Becker wrote on 05/02/2015 14:01:
Rowan Collins wrote:
There is nothing new about PHP's userland int type being 64-bit on
64-bit platforms. For instance, raising 2 to the power of 62 returns
exactly the same thing on every version of PHP back to 4.3.0:
http://3v4l.org/VBMbv
Unfortuna
Rowan Collins wrote:
> There is nothing new about PHP's userland int type being 64-bit on
> 64-bit platforms. For instance, raising 2 to the power of 62 returns
> exactly the same thing on every version of PHP back to 4.3.0:
> http://3v4l.org/VBMbv
Unfortunately, that's not true for Windows, see
Lester Caine wrote on 05/02/2015 12:33:
On 05/02/15 11:37, Andrea Faulds wrote:
The current description isn’t totally inaccurate, but I had considered renaming
the RFC since “big integer support” implies we don’t already have support for
big integers, though we do in the form of ext/gmp. A bet
On 05/02/15 11:37, Andrea Faulds wrote:
> Hi Lester,
>
>> On 5 Feb 2015, at 10:58, Lester Caine wrote:
>>
>> Can I please rename the 'big integer' rfc to 'unconstrained integer' for
>> two reasons. One BIGINT does have well established definitions in the
>> last 10+ years of PHP and other code ba
Hi Lester,
> On 5 Feb 2015, at 10:58, Lester Caine wrote:
>
> Can I please rename the 'big integer' rfc to 'unconstrained integer' for
> two reasons. One BIGINT does have well established definitions in the
> last 10+ years of PHP and other code bases.
This is not true. The terms ‘arbitrary-pre
Been tied up with a family matter for the last couple of days, so I've
not been able to read all 200 posts in my in box for internals.
Whilst I've been away from the computer I've had time to contemplate,
and I think we need to summarise the discussions in a different way. A
number of disjointed t
10 matches
Mail list logo
