Possibly, since I got it wrong once more....
About to give up, but attached, Updated patch.


John Hansen

-----Original Message-----
From: Oliver Elphick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Saturday, August 07, 2004 3:56 PM
To: Tom Lane
Cc: John Hansen; Hackers; Patches
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] UNICODE characters above 0x10000

On Sat, 2004-08-07 at 06:06, Tom Lane wrote:
> Now it's entirely possible that the underlying support is a few bricks

> shy of a load --- for instance I see that pg_utf_mblen thinks there 
> are no UTF8 codes longer than 3 bytes whereas your code goes to 4.  
> I'm not an expert on this stuff, so I don't know what the UTF8 spec 
> actually says.  But I do think you are fixing the code at the wrong

UTF-8 characters can be up to 6 bytes long:

glibc provides various routines (mb...) for handling Unicode.  How many
of our supported platforms don't have these?  If there are still some
that don't, wouldn't it be better to use the standard routines where
they do exist?

Oliver Elphick                                          [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Isle of Wight                              http://www.lfix.co.uk/oliver
GPG: 1024D/A54310EA  92C8 39E7 280E 3631 3F0E  1EC0 5664 7A2F A543 10EA
     "Be still before the LORD and wait patiently for him;
      do not fret when men succeed in their ways, when they
      carry out their wicked schemes." 
                            Psalms 37:7 

Attachment: wchar.c.patch
Description: wchar.c.patch

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
      subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
      message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

Reply via email to