Re: RFC: unicode.semantics: runtime or not?

On 6-Sep-06, at 2:28 PM, M. Sokolewicz wrote:

Ilia Alshanetsky wrote:

From a technical perspective it makes sense to keep it php.ini only setting or as Sara insists (STARTUP phase only). However, from a user (hosting companies) perspective it adds a fair degree of complexity to their setup, which would probably mean one php6 instance will need to run as CGI or FCGI, which will without a doubt affect adoption rates and/or or unicode.semantics being enabled by default on most installs. Personally, I think we'd be better off with a slower adoption rate, but a more robust PHP without added engine/language complexity per- dir unicode.semantics would add. Ilia Alshanetsky

My personal opinion, as humble as it may be, is that it's pure bullshit to even give the chance of disabling it. WHY in hell's name would you want to give hoster's the choice?

Well, with unicode semantics enabled, many PHP applications that have not been designed with PHP6+unicode in mind are likely to break. On the other hand when semantics are off, those applications may work just fine. The other reason could be that unicode enabled PHP will be noticeably slower then the one without it, so hosters to conserve system resources may only enable it for people who actually need the functionality. Ilia Alshanetsky