Re: What "Unicode support" really means

On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 10:18 AM, Marco Schuster <marco+php@m-s-d.eu> wrote: > Hi Pierre, > > On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 8:01 AM, Pierre Joye <pierre.php@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 7:52 AM, Lester Caine <lester@lsces.co.uk> wrote: >> >>> Until there is some agreement here I don't think that the next stage can be taken >>> forward. >> >> I disagree here. Unicode support for identifiers (see below) is a very >> small part of what is required to actually support Unicode. See my >> initial mail about Unicode support, I think it would help to focus on >> the design first, before going down (or better said, up) to the user >> land details. >> >>> If the core is ASCII only, then PHP requires other solutions to handling >>> unicode material in databases ... that needs to be part of the roadmap. >>> >>> I will quite happily accept ASCII only core, but IS it the right way >>> forward? Or just another quick fix to something people see as too difficult? >> >> The core won't support ascii only, that's the whole point. But I only >> referred to Unicode names for identifiers (variables, contants, >> methods, classes or functions names). > Urgh, no. Please not. This will without a doubt lead people to code in > e.g. raw Chinese/other asiatic languages or kyrillic, and so other > people without a Chinese keyboard will not be able to adapt or modify > the code as they cannot type the variable names. We only partially and "buggily" support non ASCII now. All I am saying is that I am not in favor or improving unicode support for the language entities itself, nor adding full unicode support for it. I see no gain. But again, that's not really my high priority, and I doubt it is a priority for anyone else either. I rather focus on other parts of Unicode support for now as discussing that does not help me much :) Cheers, -- Pierre @pierrejoye | http://www.libgd.org