From: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
---|---|
To: | Jacob Champion <pchampion(at)vmware(dot)com> |
Cc: | "pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com" <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, "horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com" <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>, "laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at" <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: badly calculated width of emoji in psql |
Date: | 2021-07-19 07:46:21 |
Message-ID: | YPUtzT0J8cZByTkD@paquier.xyz |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jul 07, 2021 at 06:03:34PM +0000, Jacob Champion wrote:
> I would guess that's the key issue here. If we choose a particular
> width for emoji characters, is there anything keeping a terminal's font
> from doing something different anyway?
I'd say that we are doing our best in guessing what it should be,
then. One cannot predict how fonts are designed.
> We could also keep the fragments as-is and generate a full interval
> table, like common/unicode_combining_table.h. It looks like there's
> roughly double the number of emoji intervals as combining intervals, so
> hopefully adding a second binary search wouldn't be noticeably slower.
Hmm. Such things have a cost, and this one sounds costly with a
limited impact. What do we gain except a better visibility with psql?
> In your opinion, would the current one-line patch proposal make things
> strictly better than they are today, or would it have mixed results?
> I'm wondering how to help this patch move forward for the current
> commitfest, or if we should maybe return with feedback for now.
Based on the following list, it seems to me that [u+1f300,u+0x1faff]
won't capture everything, like the country flags:
http://www.unicode.org/emoji/charts/full-emoji-list.html
--
Michael
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2021-07-19 07:52:42 | Re: Failure with 004_logrotate in prairiedog |
Previous Message | Peter Smith | 2021-07-19 07:30:27 | Re: [HACKERS] logical decoding of two-phase transactions |