| From: | "Nagaura, Ryohei" <nagaura(dot)ryohei(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | 'Tom Lane' <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Tsunakawa, Takayuki" <tsunakawa(dot)takay(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>, "Matsumura, Ryo" <matsumura(dot)ryo(at)jp(dot)fujitsu(dot)com>, "'jingwangian(at)gmail(dot)com'" <jingwangian(at)gmail(dot)com>, "'michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com'" <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, "'meskes(at)postgresql(dot)org'" <meskes(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "'pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org'" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | RE: [suggestion]support UNICODE host variables in ECPG |
| Date: | 2018-12-26 01:26:37 |
| Message-ID: | EDA4195584F5064680D8130B1CA91C453B6868@G01JPEXMBYT04 |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
On Fri, Dec 21, 2018 at 5:08 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> I don't think I buy that argument; it falls down as soon as you consider
> characters above U+FFFF. I worry that by supporting UTF16, we'd basically
> be encouraging users to write code that fails on such characters, which
> doesn't seem like good project policy.
Oh, I mistook.
Thank you for pointing out.
On Mon, Dec 24, 2018 at 5:07 PM, Matsumura Ryo wrote:
> I think that the first benefit of suggestion is providing a way to treat
> UTF16 chars for application. Whether or not to support above
> U+FFFF (e.g. surrogate pair) may be a next discussion.
Thank you for your comments.
Yes, I'd like to judge the necessity of this function before designing.
Best regards,
---------------------
Ryohei Nagaura
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2018-12-26 01:58:26 | Re: pg_dumpall --exclude-database option |
| Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2018-12-26 00:36:57 | Re: Minor comment fix for pg_config_manual.h |