Re: Where are we ACTUALLY on Unicode?

On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 7:32 PM, Rasmus Lerdorf <rasmus@lerdorf.com> wrote: > Well, the obvious original reason is that ICU uses UTF-16 internally and > the logic was that we would be going in and out of ICU to do all the > various Unicode operations many more times than we would be interfacing > with external things like MySQL or files on disk.  You generally only > read or write a string once from an external source, but you may perform > multiple Unicode operations on that same string so avoiding a conversion > for each operation seems logical. Exactly, that's why I was not so affirmative about using UTF-8 over UTF-16. I would like to evaluate both solutions with a small set of PHP features (say some file ops, 1-2 DBs and part of the core string functions) and see the impact of using UTF-8 or UTF-16. But it is definitivelly not a small decision. -- Pierre @pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org