RE: [PEAR-DEV] Package Proposal: Image_JPEG

Perhaps I should include your native code for reading the IPTC data for a "pure" PHP implementation. This way, your class can inherit the Image_IPTC class and have the functionality needed to parse the IPTC using just PHP. On the otherhand, a programmer only interested in the IPTC portion of an image would use the Image_IPTC class directly, thus allowing for the direct use of iptcembed() and iptcparse(). While it does add an additional layer of overhead to the fundamental class, it makes it possible for the choice of using a "pure" PHP version versus a builtin version. Just an idea. :-) If you have questions, comments, or suggestions about the aforementioned message, you can respond by replying to this message or contacting us at (309)-743-0800. Thank you. Regards, Patrick O'Lone Internet Software Engineer TownNews.com (309)-743-0809 polone@townnews.com > -----Original Message----- > From: Pierre-Alain Joye [mailto:paj@pearfr.org] > Sent: Tuesday, May 06, 2003 4:53 PM > To: Sebastian Delmont > Cc: pear-dev@lists.php.net > Subject: Re: [PEAR-DEV] Package Proposal: Image_JPEG > > > On Tue, 06 May 2003 17:42:27 -0400 > Sebastian Delmont <sdelmont@zonageek.com> wrote: > > > > Both packages are valuable... each one has a different set of > > requirements, and each one provides a different level of > performance. > > > I think a good comparison would be str_replace() vs. > preg_replace(). > > One is more powerful, the other is faster and simpler... you get to > > decide which one to use according to your needs. > > I do not like anymore str_replace & preg comparaison ;). > > > Image_JPEG would provide much more than what Image_IPTC does. A lot > > more. So in terms of functionality, it could replace it. > But for that > > same reason, it is a lot slower. And there is no way of doing > > Image_JPEG as fast as Image_IPTC. So I believe both packages could > > co-exist without problems. > > I understand the differences, but I'm still for a single > package ( btw nice work :) ). Image_JPEG should be, at least, > Image_IPTC_JPEG, or something like that, as a sub class of Image_IPTC. > > I do not see any good reason to have 2 packages to work with > IPTC, this is not the same situation as we may have with > others packages like templates. > > pierre > > -- > PEAR Development Mailing List (http://pear.php.net/) > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php >