Am 03.02.2015 17:44 schrieb "Andrea Faulds" <a...@ajf.me>: > > > > On 3 Feb 2015, at 14:49, Lester Caine <les...@lsces.co.uk> wrote: > > > > On 03/02/15 14:03, Andrea Faulds wrote: > >> But I don’t consider 0.25MB extra to be such a problem in practice. The PHP binary is already huge, and every system running PHP will have ample memory. > > > > Yes one approach is 'computers are getting faster with lots of memory' > > ... and for servers this is not a problem ... they will more than > > likely be 64bit anyway! But for smaller embedded devices php *IS* > > becoming an option so I don't have to program in C or something else, > > and then we look to strip everything that does not need to be present. > > Sure, but I don’t think we shouldn’t cripple the language merely for the sake of really low-end embedded devices. Also, I’m not convinced that the overhead, at least in terms of file size, is really that big of an issue. > > Just for you, I’ve gone and compiled the bigint branch (with LibTomMath) and master on my machine: > > $ ls -l php7-* > -rwxr-xr-x 1 ajf staff 6400408 3 Feb 16:39 php7-bigint > -rwxr-xr-x 1 ajf staff 6248920 3 Feb 16:42 php7-master > > The difference is a mere 151488 B, or 151 KB. > > Is that really so bad? > > -- > Andrea Faulds > http://ajf.me/ > > > > > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php >
Please get this mayor feature finally into the core.... In the current century a real 64bit support is not discussable anymore...
