Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:67538 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 88825 invoked from network); 27 May 2013 04:05:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 27 May 2013 04:05:51 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=smalyshev@sugarcrm.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=smalyshev@sugarcrm.com; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain sugarcrm.com designates 108.166.43.123 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 108.166.43.123 smtp123.ord1c.emailsrvr.com Linux 2.6 Received: from [108.166.43.123] ([108.166.43.123:41620] helo=smtp123.ord1c.emailsrvr.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id 02/0B-32733-C9BD2A15 for ; Mon, 27 May 2013 00:05:50 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp8.relay.ord1c.emailsrvr.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 1795A1A015A; Mon, 27 May 2013 00:05:45 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: OK Received: by smtp8.relay.ord1c.emailsrvr.com (Authenticated sender: smalyshev-AT-sugarcrm.com) with ESMTPSA id 30CCB1A014C; Mon, 27 May 2013 00:05:43 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <51A2DB98.6020501@sugarcrm.com> Date: Sun, 26 May 2013 21:05:44 -0700 Organization: SugarCRM User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Adam Harvey CC: PHP internals References: <61BC4F17-86D9-4CBD-B185-58A2D4AFAE5F@rouvenwessling.de> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Proposal for better UTF-8 handling From: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com (Stas Malyshev) Hi! > I agree with Nikita — I'm not against adding more Unicode/charset > handling functions if they make sense (and I haven't looked at the > code for this particular proposal yet), particularly if they'd be part > of a default build, but enough water has hopefully passed under the Did you mean "would *not* be part of the default build"? Because having yet another way of handling utf-8 (also basing on yet another separate library so with potential for incompatibilities and quirks) doesn't look like a good idea. Having yet another PECL ext is not a big deal, but having yet another way by default certainly would only create confusion. -- Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ (408)454-6900 ext. 227