On 06/07/07, Derick Rethans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Fri, 6 Jul 2007, Richard Quadling wrote:
> On 06/07/07, Antony Dovgal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 06.07.2007 15:32, Richard Quadling wrote:
> > > If Unicode had been an extension (one of those that are part of the
> > > core and cannot be disabled) with its own
> > > classes/exceptions/functions/etc, then everyone would have been happy.
> >
> > Moreover, we do have such an extension, it's called "mbstring" and
> > you can use it even in PHP4. But the point is that it's _just an
> > extension_, hence the Unicode support is far far from full.
>
> Why couldn't mbstring be upgraded to offer "full" Unicode support?
Because to support Unicode the *engine* needs to be able to work with
it. That is not something you can do with an extension.
Derick
Ah. OK. Thanks for clarifying this. And because the engine needs it,
those that don't want it need to disable it and now we're back to the
unicode.semantics option. Ho hum.
--
-----
Richard Quadling
Zend Certified Engineer : http://zend.com/zce.php?c=ZEND002498&r=213474731
"Standing on the shoulders of some very clever giants!"
--
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
