Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:79503
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain gmail.com designates 74.125.82.47 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <54871578.6050202@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2014 15:30:00 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: internals@lists.php.net
References: <E21EA75D-69AA-408C-88B7-C8022E9FB2C7@ajf.me> <CADG7izVM1qVFQC9wp4An=sTn-VB-PSkSmUgNUiOFRsm9uGDF6A@mail.gmail.com> <10EE9A5B-1711-455A-AB6A-6E7EA858D081@ajf.me> <5486AFA3.3000402@lsces.co.uk> <FAD2C229-4AE8-49CC-8DA3-0180B796A784@ajf.me> <5486FA8B.2070206@lsces.co.uk> <07B2909B-359D-401E-B9CC-DAC0E8F22B19@ajf.me> <5487104E.7020201@lsces.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <5487104E.7020201@lsces.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [VOTE][RFC] Unicode Codepoint Escape Syntax
From: rowan.collins@gmail.com (Rowan Collins)

Lester Caine wrote on 09/12/2014 15:07:
> On 09/12/14 14:07, Andrea Faulds wrote:
>>> On 9 Dec 2014, at 13:35, Lester Caine <lester@lsces.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 09/12/14 13:07, Andrea Faulds wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 9 Dec 2014, at 08:15, Lester Caine <lester@lsces.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> If ICU is to be adopted as the base for unicode support, then surely
>>>>> everything else should follow those rules?
>>>>> \uhhhh and \Uhhhhhhhh are defined along with \x{hhhhhh} so does it make
>>>>> sense to add something which is not part of ICU?
>>>> Er, where does ICU define \uXXXX and \UXXXXXX? I don't unferstand.
>>> http://userguide.icu-project.org/strings/regexp
>> We aren't using ICU regular expressions, and ICU is merely an implementation detail anyway.
> Has THAT been agreed on? Surely if using ICU fully in PHP7 in place of
> the patchwork of current fixes for unicode then we don't want to be
> breaking thing again by odd differences from the core code for unicode?
> I though the agreement was that there was no resource to create an
> alternative from scratch?

I think what Andrea's getting at is that the fact that ICU is in use 
under the hood shouldn't be particularly visible to users. If PHP gets 
"Unicode support" (whatever that turns out to mean), what the user 
should see is *PHP's Unicode facilities*; only core devs and package 
maintainers will need to know that those are implemented using ICU. As 
such, there's no automatic need for PHP to do everything the same way as 
ICU.

-- 
Rowan Collins
[IMSoP]