On 2024-May-05, David Rowley wrote: > On Sun, 5 May 2024 at 12:41, Erik Wienhold <e...@ewie.name> wrote: > > So, I think we should either remove that one nchar instance (because it > > doesn't add any real value) or document it properly. The attached patch > > does the latter. > > It seems easier to do the former, that way we don't need to reconsider > Peter's concerns about not having enough confidence that it matches > the standard. > > I've included Alvaro and Peter to see what they think.
Yeah, I too am inclined to remove it. This text was initially written by Mantrova, Bartunov and Glukhov and posted in [1] without further explanation, from where it was copied by Glukhov into [2]; the one I committed is a direct derivate from that. There was no discussion about nchar specifically that I can see, and at least I simply failed to realize that nchar was not something that we talk about. I'll remove it from the list, and backpatch to 16. [1] https://postgr.es/m/732208d3-56c3-25a4-8f08-3be1d54ad...@postgrespro.ru [2] https://postgr.es/m/8c1ba295-fa42-d4f2-a155-76cf3327d...@postgrespro.ru % If you, Erik, want to spend some time thinking through the standard definition of NCHAR and whether we conform, perhaps we can document it more fully. -- Álvaro Herrera 48°01'N 7°57'E — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/ "Java is clearly an example of money oriented programming" (A. Stepanov)
