>> On 21 Jan 2008, at 14:38, Antony Dovgal wrote:
>>> 3) 2+ bigger codebase [1] (with lots of duplicates because we have to
>>> do
>>> same things in native and unicode modes);
>>
>> From the cross-reference I assume you mean PHP's codebase. We still
>> need binary string support — Unicode is only suitable for textual
>> content. Images, for example, are binary data and we still need binary
>> strings for them. Not everything people deal with in PHP is a textual
>> string.
>>
> He could really be referring to both, honestly. The size of codebases in
> PHP applications will grow as a result, as developers will have to
> provide the "compatibility ports" for making their code work with both
> the switch on and off. Either that, or they just have to support one or
> the other, but not both. Which results in vendors alienating their
> userbase because they happen to be on a host or server that has the
> option set out of their favor for whatever reason.
>
> And if I remember correctly, there's an explicit typecast (binary) for
> binary data now, isn't there?

unicode and binary typecasts are not backwards compatible.

-- 
Tomas

-- 
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Reply via email to