top-posting because it's already messed up... You will need a massive education effort in PHP 6 to start using b"foo" for all non-UTF-8 strings because PHP 7 default will be UTF-8.
Or, yes, you will be in the same boat for PHP 7. Or you can just start the education effort now and not release PHP 6 for a over a year... I don't think you really want the latter option, but it's there... On Wed, January 23, 2008 7:23 pm, Steph Fox wrote: > Unicode is a 'big scary beast' because people don't know what impact > it will > or won't have on their applications. If they're ISO-8859-1 apps there > shouldn't be an issue - but where has anyone ever said that? > > There are two options open at this point for PHP 6: unicode-only and a > MASSIVE push for user education way before it even becomes available, > _or_ > you hold it all back and force 'non-standard' (sorry rest of the > world) > languages to use markers. > > - Steph > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Andrei Zmievski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Steph Fox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: "Rasmus Lerdorf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Chris Stockton" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "php-dev" <internals@lists.php.net> > Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2008 1:00 AM > Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] why we must get rid of unicode.semantics switch > ASAP > > >> What's going to make PHP 7 different than PHP 6? We'll be back to >> the same >> discussion then. PHP 5 people have had a long time to work with >> mbstring, >> etc and still Unicode a big scary beast. >> >> -Andrei >> >> Steph Fox wrote: >>> Blimey. I agree with Rasmus. That's twice now! >>> >>> I think PHP 6 should be an interim period with support for both >>> scenarios, but with the default being bog-standard as-we-know-it >>> IS_STRING and anything IS_UNICODE needing to be marked. >>> >>> Perhaps PHP 7 can drop the IS_STRING stuff and have it all >>> IS_UNICODE, by >>> removing the need to mark unicode text and taking it all that way. >>> I >>> think doing this in PHP 6 will make for a white elephant situation >>> (and >>> we like purple-blue, no?) >>> >>> - Steph >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rasmus Lerdorf" >>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> To: "Chris Stockton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> Cc: "php-dev" <internals@lists.php.net> >>> Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 7:28 PM >>> Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] why we must get rid of unicode.semantics >>> switch >>> ASAP >>> >>> >>>> I don't disagree with this, and that is actually why I insisted on >>>> having the unicode-semantics switch from the early days of the >>>> Unicode >>>> discussions, so you can blame me, again, if you consider it a bad >>>> design >>>> decision. >>>> >>>> My take on it was that just about all ISPs would run with Unicode >>>> semantics off and that the Unicode semantics on mode was more >>>> geared for >>>> large standalone applications and sites that wanted the luxury of >>>> working natively in their chosen character set without needing to >>>> always >>>> jump through hoops. >>>> >>>> If we get rid of the switch, then I agree that we can't make the >>>> default >>>> string IS_UNICODE. We would be crippling the implementation and >>>> taking >>>> a step backwards in terms of leading the way in Unicode adoption. >>>> The >>>> longterm goal for just about everyone has got to be a "Unicode >>>> everywhere" approach. It used to be that the Web was primarily a >>>> Western single-byte charset phenomena, but that hasn't been the >>>> case for >>>> years. All major applications out there have implemented various >>>> hacks >>>> to deal with these issues, some with more success than others. >>>> >>>> This is what PHP does. We take common Web development pains and >>>> try to >>>> reduce them. Think back to the pains of XML parsing in PHP 3 and >>>> even >>>> in PHP 4 compared to today. >>>> >>>> Ultimately we need to get to Unicode everywhere, and the Unicode >>>> semantics switch was an acknowledgement that the world isn't quite >>>> ready >>>> for that yet. But it sounds like the world isn't ready for the >>>> switch >>>> either. Without it, I am afraid we will never get there, and that >>>> may >>>> just be something we have to live with. >>>> >>>> -Rasmus >>>> >>>> Chris Stockton wrote: >>>>> I partially agree, I have been watching this discussion and it's >>>>> funny >>>>> how we have such a class of high end developers saying to break >>>>> old >>>>> PHP code. But, the majority of the success of PHP is not due to >>>>> this >>>>> small class of high end developers, it's due to it's availability >>>>> in a >>>>> shared hosting environment, and the ease of use for beginners, >>>>> and the >>>>> oodles of fairly poor quality code that is easy to copy and paste >>>>> onto >>>>> peoples websites. >>>>> >>>>> Look at the adoption of php4, many webhosts haven't even updated >>>>> to >>>>> PHP5 completely due to things like register_globals and small >>>>> backwards compatibility breakage. The list of problems is small >>>>> and >>>>> correctable, if you give system engineers at all of these hosting >>>>> companies the choice of A. Upgrade to php6 and drive support >>>>> calls >>>>> through the roof, or B. Stay at PHP4/5 for eternity until a more >>>>> (insert your complaints / rants here) language comes along to >>>>> dethrone >>>>> PHP. >>>>> >>>>> Problem is, PHP has been built to great success based on it's >>>>> early >>>>> foundation, but now a group of high class developers want it to >>>>> be >>>>> more then PHP was built onto. You will sacrifice it's success if >>>>> backwards compatibility is not just, broke, but obliterated. Why >>>>> change PHP's philosophy? Keep it easy for the new user, keep it >>>>> successful, and make me work a little more when I want to >>>>> implement my >>>>> "high class" development methodologies. I don't mind, I do it >>>>> already. >>>>> >>>>> I write this as a "high class" developer. >>>>> >>>>> -1 >>>>> >>>>> -Chris >>>>> >>>>> On Jan 22, 2008 7:32 PM, Richard Lynch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>>>> On Mon, January 21, 2008 8:38 am, Antony Dovgal wrote: >>>>>>> 6 reasons why we must to get rid of The Switch ASAP >>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------- >>>>>> I was +1... >>>>>> >>>>>> Until folks started posting that old PHP scripts won't run as-is >>>>>> in >>>>>> PHP 6?... >>>>>> >>>>>> That's just daft... >>>>>> >>>>>> When my webhost upgrades to PHP 6, I need all my old scripts to >>>>>> just >>>>>> keep on chugging away, as much as possible... >>>>>> >>>>>> I really think we're stuck with the default "string" being an >>>>>> old-school binary string, unless you want to lose a LOT of users >>>>>> in a >>>>>> hurry, or have PHP 5 stick around forever and ever. >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Some people have a "gift" link here. >>>>>> Know what I want? >>>>>> I want you to buy a CD from some indie artist. >>>>>> http://cdbaby.com/from/lynch >>>>>> Yeah, I get a buck. So? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List >>>>>> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List >>>> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php >>>> >>> > > -- > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > > -- Some people have a "gift" link here. Know what I want? I want you to buy a CD from some indie artist. http://cdbaby.com/from/lynch Yeah, I get a buck. So? -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
