Re: [RFC] UString
| From: | Joe Watkins | Date: | Thu, 23 Oct 2014 08:26:20 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: [RFC] UString | ||
| References: | 1 2 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-78262@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
On Tue, 2014-10-21 at 07:49 -0700, Sara Golemon wrote:
> > On Oct 21, 2014, at 0:06, Joe Watkins <pthreads@pthreads.org> wrote:
> >
> > Morning internalz,
> >
> > https://wiki.php.net/rfc/ustring
> >
> > This is the result of work done by a few of us, we won't be opening any
> > vote in a fortnight. We have a long time before 7, there is no rush
> > whatever.
> >
>
> The backend abstraction seems overengineered to me. It could also lead to inconsistencies in
> behavior if ICU and Windows implement something in subtly different ways.
>
> Since we're linking ICU for the rest of the intl extension anyway, it seems to me like we
> should just focus on it as an ICU wrapper.
>
> Also, I'd peopose a minor ammendment to this RFC that other intl classes be extended to
> support taking UString instances as arguments (avoiding the implicit conversion to UTF8). That work
> doesn't have to gate adoption of the base implementation, it'd just be useful to decide at
> the same time if we want to do so.
>
> -Sara
Actually I agree, I just needed a few people to say WTF.
Backend gone, we are gonna use ICU, rfc/ext updated.
INTL is still an open question yeah, preference noted.
Cheers
Joe