Tomas Kuliavas schreef:

....

me, I'm all for dropping unicode.semantics - Antony makes strong points
and it can only help the quality of the product if exceptions and switchable
functionality is kept to a minimum. from a developers POV the same is true,
additionally 'forcing' unicode on the masses will increase awareness and
speed up the uptake of the necessary skills (imho).

+1 for Antony's proposal


over noisy standard string functions that require strict unicode/binary
type checks - worse than php5

locale functions that report success even when locale is invalid - worse
than php5

php6 is not even alpha stage yet AFAICT. lets give the devs a chance before
jumping on these kinds of issues, no?

can't use same code in php5 and php6 - bad. Instead of making your code
backwards compatible, you are forcing others to maintain two incompatible
codebases.

unicode.semantics is not php.ini only, it is PHP_INI_SYSTEM.

same difference. I don't see how 'having' to maintain two incompatible
versions for different [major] php versions is effectively any different
to maintaining two incompatible versions due to the unicode.semantics switch.

given past experience with attempts to offer users a compatibility switch
(as Antony pointed out) it is very likely that the result will be that you'll
actually end up maintaining 3 incompatible versions: php5, php6 US=on and php6 
US=off.

another point to consider is that more than likely the take up of php6 will
not be very fast - comparable to php5's take up in the face of php4. given that
this is likely to be the case you will probably have a long grace period where
you'll only need to support php5 - time which can be spend developing towards 
php6
without the hassle of having to deal with production users, etc.



--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Reply via email to