Re: What "Unicode support" really means

On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 8:33 PM, Andrea Faulds <ajf@ajf.me> wrote: > > On 5 Mar 2014, at 08:29, Lester Caine <lester@lsces.co.uk> wrote: >> The first question that still has not been answered is whether there is a general consensus >> that the whole core should cleanly support UTF-8 or be restricted to a single byte subset? >> Don't mix 'locale' up with this! We need an acceptable 'global' set of >> rules which the core works to, for which a 'single byte locale' MAY be the preferred >> option for everyone? > > Yes, the entire core should and must support Unicode. Whether that be UTF-8 is a different > question, since we could also use UTF-32, for example. I do not think UTF-32 is even remotely an option. And both UTF-16 and UTF-32 bring us back to the initial issue we had with the previous unicode support attempt. UTF-16 is faster to process but the huge of conversions (to and from) kill any performance gains, even worst, it made php slower. Cheers, -- Pierre @pierrejoye | http://www.libgd.org