[PHP-DEV] Re: str_ireplace vs. stri_replace

2003-01-31 Thread Maxim Maletsky
Ilia A. writes: 1. Not all users will notice the extra parameter easily. Will take some time. This modification will not appear until PHP 5 is released, by then this extra parameter (hopefully) will be well documented and people will be aware that it exists. Adding extra code, which virtually

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: str_ireplace vs. stri_replace

2003-01-30 Thread Sascha Schumann
On Fri, 31 Jan 2003, Derick Rethans wrote: > On Thu, 30 Jan 2003, Sara Golemon wrote: > > > Only one complaint. > > > > > So, we could relegate those VERY few who might've used that fourth parameter > > already to the "read the changelog or suffer" bucket, ornot. > > I think this group of

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: str_ireplace vs. stri_replace

2003-01-30 Thread Derick Rethans
On Thu, 30 Jan 2003, Sara Golemon wrote: > Only one complaint. > So, we could relegate those VERY few who might've used that fourth parameter > already to the "read the changelog or suffer" bucket, ornot. I think this group of people is very small (less then 10 I assume), so I dont se

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: str_ireplace vs. stri_replace

2003-01-30 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
Well, if you're doing that, go ahead and change stristr() and strstr() too... And eregi() and ereg()... It should be done one way or another. Besides, wasn't one of the points in introducing this function that so many users were looking for it? "Jon Parise" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message [EM

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: str_ireplace vs. stri_replace

2003-01-30 Thread Ilia A.
> 1. Not all users will notice the extra parameter easily. Will take some > time. This modification will not appear until PHP 5 is released, by then this extra parameter (hopefully) will be well documented and people will be aware that it exists. Adding extra code, which virtually does the same

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: str_ireplace vs. stri_replace

2003-01-30 Thread Maxim Maletsky
On Thu, 30 Jan 2003 17:11:53 -0500 "Ilia A." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On January 30, 2003 04:55 pm, Jon Parise wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 30, 2003 at 01:44:27PM -0800, Sara Golemon wrote: > > > You're not the first to voice this opinion. *I* feel str_ireplace is > > > better as it follows the na

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: str_ireplace vs. stri_replace

2003-01-30 Thread Marcus Börger
FWIW: Given this mess, and the fact that any php-coded stri_replace can be overloaded, I think a new function is better. Also - it's in sync with the other stri* functions. Either change all with a case-insensativity paramenter, or keep the namingconventions that 'plague' these functions. Agg

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: str_ireplace vs. stri_replace

2003-01-30 Thread Melvyn Sopacua
On Thu, 30 Jan 2003, Melvyn Sopacua wrote: MS>>> MS>>> Given this mess, and the fact that any php-coded stri_replace can be overloaded, K, strike this. The tricks used by mbstring to overload functions, cannot be applied in userland alone. Sorry for the noise. -- With kind regards, Melvyn Sop

RE: [PHP-DEV] Re: str_ireplace vs. stri_replace

2003-01-30 Thread John Coggeshall
ldn't be. John >-Original Message- >From: Sara Golemon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2003 5:39 PM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: str_ireplace vs. stri_replace > > >> > +1 from me too, stri_replace sound like a functio

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: str_ireplace vs. stri_replace

2003-01-30 Thread Melvyn Sopacua
On Thu, 30 Jan 2003, Sara Golemon wrote: SG>>> > > +1 from me too, stri_replace sound like a function some users may have SG>>> > > SG>>> > > implemented them selves and we could end up breaking their code by SG>>> > > introducing it. SG>>> > SG>>> > exactly :). SG>>> > SG>>> Only one complaint. S

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: str_ireplace vs. stri_replace

2003-01-30 Thread Sara Golemon
> > +1 from me too, stri_replace sound like a function some users may have > > > > implemented them selves and we could end up breaking their code by > > introducing it. > > exactly :). > Only one complaint. Previously (including in 4.3.0) there already WAS a fourth (undocumented) parameter to str

RE: [PHP-DEV] Re: str_ireplace vs. stri_replace

2003-01-30 Thread Mike Robinson
Jon Parise writes: > > Get rid of stri_replace() and/or str_ireplace() and just add > a fourth optional parameter to str_replace() to control > case-sensitivity. Yup. Regards Mike Robinson -- PHP Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: str_ireplace vs. stri_replace

2003-01-30 Thread Pierre-Alain Joye
On Thu, 30 Jan 2003 17:11:53 -0500 "Ilia A." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > +1 from me too, stri_replace sound like a function some users may have > > implemented them selves and we could end up breaking their code by > introducing it. exactly :). And why introduce function name with no respect

RE: [PHP-DEV] Re: str_ireplace vs. stri_replace

2003-01-30 Thread Timothy Hitchens \(HiTCHO\)
e > Cc: Sara Golemon; PHP Developers Mailing List > Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: str_ireplace vs. stri_replace > > > On Thu, 30 Jan 2003, Jon Parise wrote: > > > On Thu, Jan 30, 2003 at 01:44:27PM -0800, Sara Golemon wrote: > > > > > You're not th

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: str_ireplace vs. stri_replace

2003-01-30 Thread Ilia A.
On January 30, 2003 04:55 pm, Jon Parise wrote: > On Thu, Jan 30, 2003 at 01:44:27PM -0800, Sara Golemon wrote: > > You're not the first to voice this opinion. *I* feel str_ireplace is > > better as it follows the naming convention of _. > > Others feel stri_replace is better as that follows ereg

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: str_ireplace vs. stri_replace

2003-01-30 Thread Derick Rethans
On Thu, 30 Jan 2003, Jon Parise wrote: > On Thu, Jan 30, 2003 at 01:44:27PM -0800, Sara Golemon wrote: > > > You're not the first to voice this opinion. *I* feel str_ireplace is better > > as it follows the naming convention of _. Others feel > > stri_replace is better as that follows eregi_rep

Re: [PHP-DEV] Re: str_ireplace vs. stri_replace

2003-01-30 Thread Jon Parise
On Thu, Jan 30, 2003 at 01:44:27PM -0800, Sara Golemon wrote: > You're not the first to voice this opinion. *I* feel str_ireplace is better > as it follows the naming convention of _. Others feel > stri_replace is better as that follows eregi_replace's style. I have no > trouble going with what

[PHP-DEV] Re: str_ireplace vs. stri_replace

2003-01-30 Thread nicos
Hello, It looks like follow ereg is nice to me. Maybe we can have a FALIAS so we can have both? -- Regards. M.CHAILLAN Nicolas [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.WorldAKT.com Hébergement de sites internets. "Sara Golemon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit dans le message de news: 006601c2c8a8$c3b141f0$[EMAIL P

[PHP-DEV] Re: str_ireplace vs. stri_replace

2003-01-30 Thread Sara Golemon
> One little thingie: shouldn't it be called stri_replace() rather than > str_ireplace() ? > You're not the first to voice this opinion. *I* feel str_ireplace is better as it follows the naming convention of _. Others feel stri_replace is better as that follows eregi_replace's style. I have no t