Mark Dilger wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Mark Dilger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
pgsql=# select chr(14989485);
(1 row)

Is there a principled rationale for this particular behavior as
opposed to any other?

In particular, in UTF8 land I'd have expected the argument of chr()
to be interpreted as a Unicode code point, not as actual UTF8 bytes
with a randomly-chosen endianness.

Not sure what to do in other multibyte encodings.

"Not sure what to do in other multibyte encodings" was pretty much my rationale for this particular behavior. I standardized on network byte order because there are only two endianesses to choose from, and the other seems to be a more surprising choice.

I looked around on the web for a standard for how to convert an integer into a valid multibyte character and didn't find anything. Andrew, Supernews has said upthread that chr() is clearly wrong and needs to be fixed. If so, we need some clear definition what "fixed" means.

Any suggestions?


Another issue to consider when thinking about the corect definition of chr() is that ascii(chr(X)) = X. This gets weird if X is greater than 255. If nothing else, the name "ascii" is no longer appropriate.


---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

Reply via email to