On Tue, 2003-02-04 at 18:21, Tom Lane wrote:
> 4. pcre looks like it's probably *not* as well suited to a multibyte
> environment.  In particular, I doubt that its UTF8 compile option was
> even turned on for the performance comparison Neil cited --- and the man
> page only promises "experimental, incomplete support for UTF-8 encoded
> strings".  The Tcl code by contrast is used only in a multibyte
> environment, so that's the supported, optimized path.  It doesn't even
> assume null-terminated strings (yay).

If we are going into code-lifting business, we should also consider
Pythons sre (a modified pcre, that works both on 8-bit and python's
unicode (either 16 or 32 byte chars, depending on compile options))

It has no specific support for "raw" utf-8 or other variable-width

Hannu Krosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

Reply via email to