On Wed, Apr 04, 2007 at 10:22:28AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Right -- IMHO what we should be doing is reject any input to chr() which
> > is beyond plain ASCII (or maybe > 255), and create a separate function
> > (unicode_char() sounds good) to get an Unicode character from a code
> > point, converted to the local client_encoding per conversion_procs.
> Hm, I hadn't thought of that approach, but another idea is that the
> argument of chr() is *always* a unicode code point, and it converts
> to the current encoding.  Do we really need a separate function?

That's what I'd advocate, but then we're not Oracle compatable...

Have a nice day,
Martijn van Oosterhout   <kleptog@svana.org>   http://svana.org/kleptog/
> From each according to his ability. To each according to his ability to 
> litigate.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply via email to