On 23/07/14 09:12, Laruence wrote: > On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 4:02 PM, Lester Caine <les...@lsces.co.uk> wrote: >> > I'm trying to work through some of the more subtle changes in phpng and >> > one that sticks out is the loss of IS_BOOL. I think the explanation is >> > that it removes a read, but while I'm only seeing a few uses of is_bool >> > across the codebase, every one of them is used simply to convert the >> > bool value into some other format. Surely what would make more sense >> > here is simply to make the type_flag either true or false, and retain >> > the IS_BOOL as a single identifiable type? Having two types both >> > indicating 'bool' just seems wrong.
> there is a _IS_BOOL macro to identifiable bool type.. > you can use it in your own codes. But THAT has to look for two types ... When the 'object' is simply 'bool' I'm looking for the explanation as to why it HAS to change rather than anything else. I can see that using the 64bit value field is overkill, but there is still plenty of spare space in the TYPE element to not have to create an extra object type? The two types of boolean just need a different type_flags entry? THEN is_false and is_true make sense as macro's of is_bool ... -- Lester Caine - G8HFL ----------------------------- Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
