php-i18n Digest 5 May 2008 17:58:14 -0000 Issue 389
Topics (messages 1166 through 1173):
Re: [PECL-CVS] cvs: pecl /intl php_intl.c /intl/doc grapheme_api.php
/intl/grapheme grapheme.h grapheme_string.c /intl/tests grapheme.phpt
1166 by: Texin, Tex
1167 by: Pierre Joye
1168 by: Texin, Tex
1169 by: Pierre Joye
1170 by: Texin, Tex
Re: [php-icu] RE: [PHP-I18N] RE: [PECL-CVS] cvs: pecl /intl php_intl.c
/intl/doc grapheme_api.php /intl/grapheme grapheme.h grapheme_string.c
/intl/tests grapheme.phpt
1171 by: Stanislav Malyshev
proposal: unification of the grapheme_extract functions
1172 by: Ed Batutis
1173 by: Stanislav Malyshev
Administrivia:
To subscribe to the digest, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To post to the list, e-mail:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
--- Begin Message ---
Hi,
For some reason when I changed my subscriptions a few weeks ago, they didn't
take.
I resubscribed to internals and i18n yesterday and it seems to be working now.
As I recall we discussed the naming and Stas did reply to the list with the
rationale.
There may not have been agreement with the rationale, but it was stated.
If you think the naming is ok, I wonder why it is still being discussed....
I have changed companies and e-mails so I am a bit out of the loop. Can someone
tell me where we are at?
tex
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andi Gutmans [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2008 3:15 PM
> To: Pierre Joye; Ed Batutis
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [PHP-I18N] RE: [PECL-CVS] cvs: pecl /intl php_intl.c
> /intl/doc grapheme_api.php /intl/grapheme grapheme.h
> grapheme_string.c /intl/tests grapheme.phpt
>
> The mailing list to the best of my knowledge can be
> subscribed to also by the general public but I do think it
> makes more sense to have these discussions on
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] based on http://www.php.net/mailing-lists.php.
> Please everyone only use that mailing list from now on.
>
> Andi
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Pierre Joye [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2008 12:23 PM
> > To: Ed Batutis; Andi Gutmans
> > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: [PECL-CVS] cvs: pecl /intl php_intl.c /intl/doc
> > grapheme_api.php /intl/grapheme grapheme.h grapheme_string.c
> > /intl/tests grapheme.phpt
> >
> > Hi Ed,
> >
> > On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 9:16 PM, Ed Batutis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I use "you" for all intl developers :) We sent many many mails
> > (this
> > > > list and internals) about the poor naming of these new
> functions
> > and
> > > > got zero reply so far.
> > >
> > > Personally I think the naming is OK - maybe not perfect, but what
> is
> > > perfect? Anyway, there was a long discussion about this
> on the php-
> > icu list.
> > > I think that's where you might want to post your thoughts.
> >
> > How ironic, this list is still private despite our discussions. I
> > think that that helps me to finally (re)consider intl.
> >
> > Regards,
> > --
> > Pierre
> > http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org
>
> --
> PHP Unicode & I18N Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To
> unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi!
On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 1:03 AM, Texin, Tex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For some reason when I changed my subscriptions a few weeks ago, they didn't
> take.
> I resubscribed to internals and i18n yesterday and it seems to be working
> now.
>
> As I recall we discussed the naming and Stas did reply to the list with the
> rationale.
> There may not have been agreement with the rationale, but it was stated.
I can't find a discussion about that.
> If you think the naming is ok, I wonder why it is still being discussed....
>
> I have changed companies and e-mails so I am a bit out of the loop. Can
> someone tell me where we are at?
For what I understand and see, there is (still) the php-icu list which
is not public, not under lists.php.net, has no pbulic way to
subscribe. That's what Bjori, other (me included) has been argued
about since weeks now. The php-i18n list was dead until recently but
the big issue here is the discussions about intl happening outside
the public space.
Cheers,
--
Pierre
http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I am not on the php-icu list, but from my understanding of the state of the
project and the players that are working on it, there isn't much to discuss. It
is pretty well baked. (Or so I hope. I thought this would ship last Nov. I
can't believe it is May already.)
tex
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Pierre Joye [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2008 11:57 PM
> To: Texin, Tex
> Cc: Andi Gutmans; Ed Batutis; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [PHP-I18N] RE: [PECL-CVS] cvs: pecl /intl
> php_intl.c /intl/doc grapheme_api.php /intl/grapheme
> grapheme.h grapheme_string.c /intl/tests grapheme.phpt
>
> Hi!
>
> On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 1:03 AM, Texin, Tex
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > For some reason when I changed my subscriptions a few
> weeks ago, they didn't take.
> > I resubscribed to internals and i18n yesterday and it
> seems to be working now.
> >
> > As I recall we discussed the naming and Stas did reply to
> the list with the rationale.
> > There may not have been agreement with the rationale, but
> it was stated.
>
> I can't find a discussion about that.
>
> > If you think the naming is ok, I wonder why it is still
> being discussed....
> >
> > I have changed companies and e-mails so I am a bit out of
> the loop. Can someone tell me where we are at?
>
> For what I understand and see, there is (still) the php-icu
> list which is not public, not under lists.php.net, has no
> pbulic way to subscribe. That's what Bjori, other (me
> included) has been argued about since weeks now. The php-i18n
> list was dead until recently but
> the big issue here is the discussions about intl happening outside
> the public space.
>
> Cheers,
> --
> Pierre
> http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 9:12 AM, Texin, Tex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am not on the php-icu list, but from my understanding of the state of the
> project and the players that are working on it, there isn't much to discuss.
Even if there was only this discussion:
On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 9:16 PM, Ed Batutis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Personally I think the naming is OK - maybe not perfect, but what is
> perfect? Anyway, there was a long discussion about this on the php-icu list.
> I think that's where you might want to post your thoughts.
It is already too much.
> It is pretty well baked. (Or so I hope. I thought this would ship last Nov. I
> can't believe it is May already.)
To be honest, I really don't understand why you took so long to
develop what I see in intl now and here. I don't consider it well
baked either, it is not bad but also not good.
Cheers,
--
Pierre
http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Pierre Joye [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, May 02, 2008 12:48 AM
> To: Texin, Tex
> Cc: Andi Gutmans; Ed Batutis; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [PHP-I18N] RE: [PECL-CVS] cvs: pecl /intl
> php_intl.c /intl/doc grapheme_api.php /intl/grapheme
> grapheme.h grapheme_string.c /intl/tests grapheme.phpt
>
> On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 9:12 AM, Texin, Tex
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I am not on the php-icu list, but from my understanding of
> the state of the project and the players that are working on
> it, there isn't much to discuss.
>
> Even if there was only this discussion:
>
> On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 9:16 PM, Ed Batutis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Personally I think the naming is OK - maybe not perfect,
> but what is
> > perfect? Anyway, there was a long discussion about this on
> the php-icu list.
> > I think that's where you might want to post your thoughts.
>
> It is already too much.
>
> > It is pretty well baked. (Or so I hope. I thought this
> would ship last
> > Nov. I can't believe it is May already.)
>
> To be honest, I really don't understand why you took so long
> to develop what I see in intl now and here. I don't consider
> it well baked either, it is not bad but also not good.
>
> Cheers,
> --
> Pierre
I suspect Ed is refering to a discussion that was held a while ago not last
week, but I don't know for sure.
By well-baked, I don't mean perfect, I mean unchanging.
It hasn't changed a whole lot over this period. DateFormatter was added in the
beginning of the year. Mostly we are waiting for it to be approved and released.
With respect to how good intl is, I suggest walking a few kilometers in the
other guys shoes. (I don't mean that in a rude way.) We put together resources
and worked to a deadline a few months later to meet the (alleged) 5.3 beta and
release schedules. There were learning curves of varying kinds to get over,
compatibilities and compromises. We expect to be able to make more improvements
in subsequent releases, but thought we had something that would be significant
for 5.2/5.3 users. The end result is not a lot of code, but we did a fair
amount of testing. It would have been great to have more resources or more time
or fewer constraints. Maybe it is time to show the team a little love. It is
after all volunteered and solves a significant problem for international users.
There isn't an option for them to do more, even though they would like to,
given other responsibilities.
tex
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi!
Regarding naming, we're basically in the same place. I will rename
DateFormatter to IntlDateFormatter to avoid clash with date extension
space - probably will do this start of next week, but the rest doesn't
seem to clash with anything.
--
Stanislav Malyshev, Zend Software Architect
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.zend.com/
(408)253-8829 MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi,
I am proposing to unify the three grapheme_extract functions this way:
string grapheme_extract ( string $haystack ,
int $size
[, int $extract_type
[, string $start ]] )
where $extract_type is:
GRAPHEME_EXTR_COUNT - $size is number of graphemes (default)
GRAPHEME_EXTR_MAXBYTES - $size is maximum number of bytes to extract
GRAPHEME_EXTR_MAXCHARS - $size is maximum number of UTF-8 character to
extract
and the other arguments are as in the current set of extract functions.
Sorry if I missed someone's proposal for this - I am only on the php-i18n
list at this point. Please post your proposal to this list, if possible.
Thanks,
=Ed
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi!
I am proposing to unify the three grapheme_extract functions this way:
string grapheme_extract ( string $haystack ,
int $size
[, int $extract_type
[, string $start ]] )
where $extract_type is:
GRAPHEME_EXTR_COUNT - $size is number of graphemes (default)
GRAPHEME_EXTR_MAXBYTES - $size is maximum number of bytes to extract
GRAPHEME_EXTR_MAXCHARS - $size is maximum number of UTF-8 character to
extract
I think it looks good.
--
Stanislav Malyshev, Zend Software Architect
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.zend.com/
(408)253-8829 MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- End Message ---
