Re: JSON for PG 9.2

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: Jeff Janes <jeff(dot)janes(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Joey Adams <joeyadams3(dot)14159(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>, Claes Jakobsson <claes(at)surfar(dot)nu>, Dimitri Fontaine <dimitri(at)2ndquadrant(dot)fr>, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Jan Urbański <wulczer(at)wulczer(dot)org>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Jan Wieck <janwieck(at)yahoo(dot)com>
Subject: Re: JSON for PG 9.2
Date: 2012-01-23 20:20:03
Message-ID: 1327350003.12714.0.camel@vanquo.pezone.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On sön, 2012-01-22 at 11:43 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Actually, given recent discussion I think that test should just be
> removed from json.c. We don't actually have any test that the code
> point is valid (e.g. that it doesn't refer to an unallocated code
> point). We don't do that elsewhere either - the unicode_to_utf8()
> function the scanner uses to turn \unnnn escapes into utf8 doesn't
> look for unallocated code points. I'm not sure how much other
> validation we should do - for example on correct use of surrogate
> pairs.

We do check the correctness of surrogate pairs elsewhere. Search for
"surrogate" in scan.l; should be easy to copy.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jim Mlodgenski 2012-01-23 20:52:35 Re: Client Messages
Previous Message Pavel Stehule 2012-01-23 20:14:14 Re: patch: ALTER TABLE IF EXISTS