2014-09-23 20:04 GMT+02:00 Marc Delisle <marc@infomarc.info>:
Hugues Peccatte a écrit :
> 2014-09-23 16:23 GMT+02:00 Marc Delisle <marc@infomarc.info>:
>
> That's it. Instead of using $pmaString->strlen or strlen, we could imagine
> to use pmaStrlen and this function would call strlen or mb_strlen if mb_*
> functions exist.
> Another way could be to overwrite strlen with mb_strlen, but we wouldn't be
> able to use the original strlen if needed. So I think that we should define
> new functions.

What I don't like is that we would have two different syntaxes to call
string functions. We would need comments in the calling code to explain
why we are using a way and not another way.

>
> I'll try to do a mass replacement and check if the execution time is better.
>
> Hugues.

--
Marc Delisle (phpMyAdmin)

If by "two ways", you think about PMA_String and pmaStr* functions, there should be a misunderstanding. I don't want to keep PMA_String (at least, not for string functions), I'd like to migrate it into functions. Here, I kept it not to break anything, just to check performance.
If you think about pmaStr* functions and standard PHP functions, I don't think this is a real issue, because we use PMA string object almost everywhere today, so it would be replaced by function calls.

Hugues.