Re: Re: Regarding the latest patch on fgetcsv() (stable branch)

On December 12, 2003 05:38 pm, Moriyoshi Koizumi wrote: > And I don't think fgetcsv() is an exception, since htmlentities() can > be referred to as an example that is placed in core and > supports multibyte strings. As I mentioned, purging that kind of > functionality into the mbstring extension doesn't solve the problem > in practice by any means. htmlentities() is a rather special function it handles not only multibyte but a whole lot of diffrent & unusual things. I do not think you can fairly compare it to fgetcsv(). We have a multibyte extension for people who need that functionality, why force it on everyone else? > >> 2) IMO speed is not a key factor here. People rather wants > >> trust-worthy behaviour. > > > > When it's a few percent and the changes offer significant improvements > > yes, > > but when were are talking about a performance loss of 250-300% or more > > then > > performance must become a consideration as well. > > If there are virtually no ways to improve it, it'd be natural to me > we dismiss the issue. Why does a vast majority of users have to endure degredation in performance for functionality that are needed by a few? It's as simple as that. Same argument applies to basename(). > One thing I'm talking about here is escaping behaviour, which I > mentioned in the previous mail. I believe it would be possible to implement in the 4.3.X code, however it sounds specific to multibyte implementation. Ilia