Fixes my earlier PR #4617
If I remember correctly,
The F0 macro is used for return values that are guaranteed to not be
reference counted.
The F1 macro is used for return values that may have up to 1 reference
(i.e. MAY_BE_RC1).
I didn't notice that time_nanosleep needed to be F1 since it could
return an array, and that array is reference counted.
It can return false if the resource type is wrong.
```
php > var_export(hash_update_stream(hash_init('md5'),
imagecreate(1,1)));
Warning: hash_update_stream(): supplied resource is not a valid stream
resource in php shell code on line 1
false
```
The return types were initially added in
c88ffa9a56
This can also return an array. See
https://www.php.net/manual/en/function.time-nanosleep.php#refsect1-function.time-nanosleep-returnvalues
> If the delay was interrupted by a signal, an associative array will be
returned with the components:
>
> - seconds - number of seconds remaining in the delay
> - nanoseconds - number of nanoseconds remaining in the delay
Sending a SIGUSR1 to the below program would trigger this behavior.
```
pcntl_signal(\SIGUSR1, function ($signo, $signinfo) {
echo "Handling a signal $signo\n";
});
echo "Sleeping for 100 seconds\n";
var_export(time_nanosleep(100, 0));
```
The incomplete signature existed since c88ffa9a5.
No phpt tests existed for time_nanosleep returning an array
The smart branch logic assumed b->start refers to the old offsets,
while b->start was already adjusted to the new offsets at this
point. Delay the change until later.
When cleaning nops in the dfa pass, we were always keeping the
smart branch inhibiting nop that occurs directly before the jump
instruction. However, as we skip unreachable blocks entirely, it
may happen that we need to keep a nop that occurs further back,
prior to the unreachable blocks. Account for that case now.
We should really do something about the smart branch situation,
this is very fragile...
LITERAL_VALUE with related literals cannot be merged, avoid inserting
them in the literals hash in the first place. Otherwise we may end up
inserting the same key multiple times. We may also miss merging
opportunities due to the duplicate keys.
Nikita Popov