Re: why we must get rid of unicode.semantics switch ASAP
| From: | Lester Caine | Date: | Thu, 24 Jan 2008 04:55:30 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: why we must get rid of unicode.semantics switch ASAP | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-34917@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
Andrei Zmievski wrote:
Or people that worry too much about characters being bytes. -Andrei Steph Fox wrote:ACTUALLY - how many people use more than the 127 character set in English anyway. I'd be more than happy to force UTF8 mode as standard and get away from 'code page hell'. This *IS* more about education and we are having similar 'discussions' in Firebird over adding unicode for field and table names. As long as there is a clean 'conversion' path that takes care of characters that DO need mapping then simplifying things by only having one method of work makes perfect sense? Most of those who complain about 'taking more space' will never see a two byte character ;) -- Lester Caine - G8HFL ----------------------------- Contact - http://home.lsces.co.uk/lsces/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://home.lsces.co.uk MEDW - http://home.lsces.co.uk/ModelEngineersDigitalWorkshop/ Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.phpWell maybe half the problem with this is that people aren't really aware of what is or isn't the issue. As I (now) understand it, the only people affected by Unicode support will be those currently using mbstring, is that correct?