Done.
On Mon, 22 Jan 2001, Martin Jansen wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Jan 2001 16:28:09 +0100 (CET), Derick Rethans wrote:
>
> >On Mon, 22 Jan 2001, Andrei Zmievski wrote:
> >> I could modify str_replace() to have the same behavior with regard to
> >> arrays as preg_replace() - if people agree that it's
On Mon, 22 Jan 2001 16:28:09 +0100 (CET), Derick Rethans wrote:
>On Mon, 22 Jan 2001, Andrei Zmievski wrote:
>> I could modify str_replace() to have the same behavior with regard to
>> arrays as preg_replace() - if people agree that it's a good idea..
>
>I think it's a good idea, makes the langua
On Mon, 22 Jan 2001, Andrei Zmievski wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Jan 2001, Jan Borsodi wrote:
> > So I ask again:
> > Are there any plans to make str_replace and ereg_replace take arrays
> > as parameters as well, in the same manner as preg_replace does?
> > (a simple yes or no will suffice)
> >
> > Or d
On Mon, 22 Jan 2001, Jan Borsodi wrote:
> So I ask again:
> Are there any plans to make str_replace and ereg_replace take arrays
> as parameters as well, in the same manner as preg_replace does?
> (a simple yes or no will suffice)
>
> Or do I have to do this myself?
I could modify str_replace()
Cynic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> so it's probably not str_replace what's slowing you down, but
> the loops? Maybe they could be optimized some more... (I don't
> want it sound like I'm saying it's your fault, or that you're
> a bad programmer, just to make it clear.)
No it's not the loops
Cynic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> why is it bad?
Why?
Because it's quite normal for functions like str_replace to be *much*
faster than preg_replace, but since str_replace on arrays is slower
(due to iterating over them using PHP code) you have to use preg_replace.
I'll happily use preg_repla
why is it bad?
At 19:45 21.1. 2001, Jan Borsodi wrote the following:
--
>Is there any plans to extend str_replace and ereg_replace to accept
>arrays in the same manner as preg_replace does?
>
>At the moment using preg_replace on arrays
