On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 2:54 PM, Oliver Ford <ojf...@gmail.com> wrote: > The formatting.c file specifies it as a TODO, so I thought implementing it > would be worthwhile. As there is a to_roman conversion having it the other > way is good for completeness.
Huh, didn't know about that. Well, I'm not direly opposed to this or anything, just not sure that it's worth spending a lot of time on. > The existing int_to_roman code goes up to 3999 so this patch is consistent > with that. I could extend both to handle Unicode values for large numbers? Well, following what the existing code does is usually a good place to start -- whether you want to try to extend it is up to you. I'm not very interested in Roman numeral handling personally, so you might want to wait for some opinions from others. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers