On Fri, Aug 22, 2014 at 1:16 PM, Nikita Popov <nikita....@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi internals! > > Today the int64 RFC has been merged, despite objections regarding the > naming changes it introduces. > > As we were not given a chance to resolve this issue before the merge, a > short proposal has been created, which aims to revert all unnecessary > naming changes and instead use type names that are consistent with the > existing code base and expectations: > > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/better_type_names_for_int64 > > Due to the unexpected merge on short notice, with no chance for discussion, > this issue is blocking a number of other patches. As such I ask if we can > move through this RFC with a shortened cycle. I would not appreciate having > to wait three weeks to have a workable codebase again.
I also request to let me add options for actual good naming (see my previous reply). I would also strongly suggest to group these renaming actions in one RFC and get rid of it in the next couple of weeks (following the usual periods for a RFC). STR macros being on top of my list. And I'd to remember that we suffer from double standards while you guys do whatever you want with ng, and certainly with ast as well. I wonder what you would say if we begin to be as picky and keep asking to change things for months :/ Cheers, -- Pierre @pierrejoye | http://www.libgd.org -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
