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 am against what you propose while being open to have better naming. Keeping what we have in 5.x is a huge mistake and will cause many issues, just like what NG does by using the same APIs or macros names but with different argument types. One example is the STR macro, a major pain. And the names of a macro should match what they actually do and the actually types they deal with, not some random totally misleading names. Cheers, -- Pierre @pierrejoye | http://www.libgd.org -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
