Robert Haas writes:
> Anyway, it's not really important enough to me to have a protracted
> argument about it. Let's wait and see if anyone else has an opinion,
> and perhaps a consensus will emerge.
Well, nobody else seems to care, so I went ahead and committed the
shorter form of the patch, ie
On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 10:20 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas writes:
>> On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 7:49 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> FWIW, I *don't* like this version, specifically because it fails to
>>> utilize the pg_wchar datatype. The function in question is neither big
>>> enough nor mutable e
Robert Haas writes:
> On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 7:49 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> FWIW, I *don't* like this version, specifically because it fails to
>> utilize the pg_wchar datatype. The function in question is neither big
>> enough nor mutable enough that it's urgent to not duplicate it between
>> the
On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 7:49 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Joseph Adams writes:
>> I've attached another patch that moves utf8_to_unicode to src/port per
>> Robert Haas's suggestion.
>
>> This patch itself is not quite as elegant as the first one because it
>> puts platform-independent code that "belongs
Joseph Adams writes:
> I've attached another patch that moves utf8_to_unicode to src/port per
> Robert Haas's suggestion.
> This patch itself is not quite as elegant as the first one because it
> puts platform-independent code that "belongs" in wchar.c into src/port
> . It also uses unsigned int
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 12:11 PM, Alvaro Herrera
wrote:
> src/include/port.h?
Oh, hey, look at that. Any thought on what to about the fact that our
two existing copies of utf2ucs() don't match? (one tests against 0xf8
where the other against 0xf0)
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enter
Robert Haas writes:
> On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 1:50 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> AFAICS the version in mbprint.c is flat out wrong, and the only reason
>> nobody's noticed is that it should never get passed a more-than-4-byte
>> sequence anyway.
> Should we fix it, then, and if so how far should we go
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 1:50 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera writes:
>> Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of vie ago 13 12:50:13 -0400 2010:
>>> Oh, hey, look at that. Any thought on what to about the fact that our
>>> two existing copies of utf2ucs() don't match? (one tests against 0xf8
Alvaro Herrera writes:
> Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of vie ago 13 12:50:13 -0400 2010:
>> Oh, hey, look at that. Any thought on what to about the fact that our
>> two existing copies of utf2ucs() don't match? (one tests against 0xf8
>> where the other against 0xf0)
> I'm not sure why i
Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of vie ago 13 12:50:13 -0400 2010:
> On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 12:11 PM, Alvaro Herrera
> wrote:
> > src/include/port.h?
>
> Oh, hey, look at that. Any thought on what to about the fact that our
> two existing copies of utf2ucs() don't match? (one tests against
Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of vie ago 13 12:00:32 -0400 2010:
> On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 3:12 AM, Joseph Adams
> wrote:
> > I've attached another patch that moves utf8_to_unicode to src/port per
> > Robert Haas's suggestion.
> >
> > This patch itself is not quite as elegant as the first on
On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 3:12 AM, Joseph Adams
wrote:
> I've attached another patch that moves utf8_to_unicode to src/port per
> Robert Haas's suggestion.
>
> This patch itself is not quite as elegant as the first one because it
> puts platform-independent code that "belongs" in wchar.c into src/po
On Tue, Jul 27, 2010 at 1:31 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 10:34 PM, Joseph Adams
> wrote:
>> In src/include/mb/pg_wchar.h , there is a function unicode_to_utf8 ,
>> but no corresponding utf8_to_unicode . However, there is a static
>> function called utf2ucs that does what utf
In src/include/mb/pg_wchar.h , there is a function unicode_to_utf8 ,
but no corresponding utf8_to_unicode . However, there is a static
function called utf2ucs that does what utf8_to_unicode would do.
I'd like this function to be available because the JSON code needs to
convert UTF-8 to and from U
14 matches
Mail list logo
