On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 3:35 PM, David Rodrigues <david.pro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It too could causes confusion with single-quote in some fonts, sizes and
> styles.
> Is more easy to identify shell_exec() than backtick usage, anyway.
> It have exactly the same behaviour than shell_exec(). Do not need adapt
> usage beyond of the replacement itself.
Those reasons are enough to move my -1 to a -0.5 (meaning I'd consider
abstaining on a vote).

The argument about reserving `foo` for unicode strings in some
far-flung future don't hold any water.
A. We tried Unicode, it went poorly, and we learned that ext/intl does
the job quite well. As someone who put a lot of work into PHP 6, I
don't see a reason to change that assessment.
B. If we DID take a second stab at unicode, we have syntax for unicode
strings already, ( u"Unicody", b"Binaryish" ) which doesn't require
coopting syntax that's been around for most of the language's


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

Reply via email to