Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:67569 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 93015 invoked from network); 28 May 2013 01:24:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 28 May 2013 01:24:54 -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 108.166.43.91 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 108.166.43.91 smtp91.ord1c.emailsrvr.com Linux 2.6 Received: from [108.166.43.91] ([108.166.43.91:51921] helo=smtp91.ord1c.emailsrvr.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id BA/18-44058-66704A15 for ; Mon, 27 May 2013 21:24:54 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp4.relay.ord1c.emailsrvr.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 25F051400AC; Mon, 27 May 2013 21:24:51 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: OK Received: by smtp4.relay.ord1c.emailsrvr.com (Authenticated sender: smalyshev-AT-sugarcrm.com) with ESMTPSA id 99C4F1400CA; Mon, 27 May 2013 21:24:50 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <51A40767.8070608@sugarcrm.com> Date: Mon, 27 May 2013 18:24:55 -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> <51A2DB98.6020501@sugarcrm.com> 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 did mean would — one issue with much of our internationalisation > code is that it's in extensions (intl, iconv, mbstring) that are > inconsistently deployed by shared hosting providers. Having some basic Shared hosting providers are completely capable of building their PHP offerings the way they want. Adding yet another - fourth? fifth? sixth? - way of doing string operations is not going to change anything. If the problem is hosting providers, it should be handled at that point, not in PHP core. > conversion and string handling functions that could be available in > ext/standard might not be a bad thing. Same argument would apply to any functionality that is useful for anybody - it all should be in ext/standard or some shared hosting provider could build PHP without it. Obviously, it's not a good argument, and if hosting provider does not provide common modules, choose another provider - there are hundreds of others just a simple search away. -- Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ (408)454-6900 ext. 227