* Thus wrote Wouter van Vliet ([EMAIL PROTECTED]): > > Btw, does anybody know why preg_replace is adviced over ereg_replace in the > manual? .. and if ereg_replace doesn't have any advantages over > preg_replace, couldn't this function get depricated?
I've done some testing with ereg and preg functions and preg beats ereg by quite a bite (sorry don't have results) preg is much more advanced and can do a lot more things than ereg can. I think just by looking at the documentation (two separate pages, not related to the functions), you can see that it is rather thorough. The biggest disadvantage with preg is that since it is complex, mistakes can easily be overlooked. Only since 4.2.0 has preg_* functions been compiled by default so if a person wanted to write scripts that were portable across many different hosting sites they would use ereg_* functions. As for being deprecated, I doubt that will happen (as mentioned above) ereg_* has been around for many years, since early 3.x versions. Php developers may be familiar with the posix syntax so instead of learning the perl version they have the option to use the ereg_* functions. Although I haven't heard any (php) claims as such but some people may want to be 100% POSIX compatible :) Curt -- "I used to think I was indecisive, but now I'm not so sure." -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
