Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:19492 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 51222 invoked by uid 1010); 7 Oct 2005 21:38:11 -0000 Delivered-To: ezmlm-scan-internals@lists.php.net Delivered-To: ezmlm-internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 51207 invoked from network); 7 Oct 2005 21:38:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 7 Oct 2005 21:38:11 -0000 X-Host-Fingerprint: 70.85.46.36 unknown Received: from ([70.85.46.36:39393] helo=prohost.org) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.0 beta r(6323M)) with SMTP id 39/85-54476-3CAE6434 for ; Fri, 07 Oct 2005 17:38:11 -0400 Received: (qmail 16132 invoked from network); 7 Oct 2005 21:38:07 -0000 Received: from cpe000fb56099fd-cm000f9f7d6664.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com (HELO ?192.168.1.101?) (69.196.29.239) by prohost.org with SMTP; 7 Oct 2005 21:38:07 -0000 Message-ID: <4346EABE.6000706@prohost.org> Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2005 17:38:06 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (Windows/20050716) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: George Schlossnagle CC: Derick Rethans , Rasmus Lerdorf , PHP Developers Mailing List References: <99dd4f75f4ceebfe1c980cf439e97416@gravitonic.com> <4346E00A.8020504@prohost.org> <4346E0C5.3090001@lerdorf.com> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 0.93.0.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Unicode Implementation From: ilia@prohost.org (Ilia Alshanetsky) George Schlossnagle wrote: >> What is wrong with PHP 5.1? People don't *have* to upgrade to the >> unicode enabled PHP if they don't want to. And it would probably be >> "nice" to have that mode for some users, but should that be over our own >> back with multiple implementations of everything? > > > Are you suggesting that people who don't want unicode should stick with > 5.1 for perpetuity? Assuming that 5.1 would be actively maintained and not just for bug fixes, I'd say that is a viable approach. There are plenty of sites that have no use for Unicode as nice as it may be, and much rather retain performance over useless (for them) functionality. Ilia