Re: POSIX regex
| From: | Jani Taskinen | Date: | Mon, 16 Jul 2007 15:25:31 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: POSIX regex | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 5 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-30984@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
Thank you Lucas and Antony. Could not agree more..
On Mon, 2007-07-16 at 19:19 +0400, Antony Dovgal wrote:
> Thank you Lukas for expressing exactly my thoughts on this.
>
> On 16.07.2007 18:24, Lukas Kahwe Smith wrote:
> > Andi Gutmans wrote:
> >> Even in PHP 6 I am not sure it's a good idea. There are a huge amount of
> >> apps that use them and it'll be very hard for people to upgrade.
> >> Anyway, let's do some more research on that once we get closer to PHP 6
> >> and see what the migration path looks like. We'll have to check with a
> >> few popular apps + google code search :)
> >> No need to decide on that right now without having more info.
> >
> > I disagree with this approach. The thing is that we need to get a clear
> > message out ASAP. This all ties into topics like if we will have a
> > unicode off/on switch or not. Delaying these decisions will hurt our
> > userbase. We need to prepare them early.
> >
> > IMHO we should use PHP6 as the clean up release. Drop unicode on/off
> > switch, accept that the bulk of all code will need to be rewritten from
> > scratch. The benefit will be that it will truely be cleaned up, people
> > will still be able to leverage the bulk of their PHP programming
> > background and they can enjoy the fastest possible unicode engine we can
> > provide them.
> >
> > PHP5 will be for the people that cannot make the jump. We will back port
> > whatever we can reasonably get into PHP5. People will linger on PHP5,
> > just as they are doing now with PHP4. So it goes. At least we will not
> > punish the early adopters for those that are unwilling to move to the
> > new version in the near future anyways.
> >
> > At any rate .. the time is now to make a decision on what its gonna be.
> > PHP6 with BC hacks or not.
> >
> > regards,
> > Lukas
> >
>
>