Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] Bug #659: lower()/upper() bug on

2002-06-12 Thread Enke, Michael
Tatsuo Ishii wrote: There are full width alphabets in Japanese. Thoes include not only ASCII letters but also some European characters. Are these ASCII and European characters uppercased in some Japanese-specific way ? Probably not, but I'm not sure since my Linux

Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] Bug #659: lower()/upper() bug on

2002-05-20 Thread Tatsuo Ishii
There are full width alphabets in Japanese. Thoes include not only ASCII letters but also some European characters. Are these ASCII and European characters uppercased in some Japanese-specific way ? Probably not, but I'm not sure since my Linux box does not have *.utf8

Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] Bug #659: lower()/upper() bug on

2002-05-17 Thread Enke, Michael
Tatsuo Ishii wrote: Are you sure that say, de_DE.utf8 locale produce meaningful results for any other languages? there are often subtle differences, but upper() and lower() are much more likely to produce right results than collation order or date/money formats. in fact seem

Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] Bug #659: lower()/upper() bug on

2002-05-14 Thread Jean-Michel POURE
Le Mardi 14 Mai 2002 03:29, Tatsuo Ishii a écrit : For example, user might want to have a table like this in a UTF-8 database: create table t1( english text,-- English message germany text,-- Germany message japanese text-- Japanese message ); Or just

Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] Bug #659: lower()/upper() bug on

2002-05-14 Thread Tatsuo Ishii
My Linux box does not have *.utf8 locales at all. Probably not so many platforms have them up to now, I guess. What linux do you use ? Kind of variant of RH6.2. At least newer Redhat Linuxen have them and I suspect that all newer glibc's are capable of using them. I guess many RH6.2

Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] Bug #659: lower()/upper() bug on

2002-05-14 Thread Hannu Krosing
On Tue, 2002-05-14 at 09:52, Tatsuo Ishii wrote: Are you sure that say, de_DE.utf8 locale produce meaningful results for any other languages? there are often subtle differences, but upper() and lower() are much more likely to produce right results than collation order or date/money formats.

Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] Bug #659: lower()/upper() bug on

2002-05-14 Thread Tatsuo Ishii
Are you sure that say, de_DE.utf8 locale produce meaningful results for any other languages? there are often subtle differences, but upper() and lower() are much more likely to produce right results than collation order or date/money formats. in fact seem to be only 10 distinct

Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] Bug #659: lower()/upper() bug on -multibyte- DB

2002-05-13 Thread Enke, Michael
Tatsuo Ishii wrote: [Cc:ed to hackers] (trying select convert(lower(convert('X', 'LATIN1')),'LATIN1','UNICODE');) Ok, this is working now (I cann't reproduce why not at the first time). Good. Is it planned to implement it so that I can write lower()/ upper() for multibyte

Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] Bug #659: lower()/upper() bug on

2002-05-13 Thread Tatsuo Ishii
I think it is really not hard to do this for UTF-8. I don't have to know the relation between the locale and the encoding. Look at this: We can use the LC_CTYPE from pg_controldata or alternatively the LC_CTYPE at server startup. For nearly every locale (de_DE, ja_JP, ...) there exists also

Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] Bug #659: lower()/upper() bug on -multibyte- DB

2002-05-10 Thread Tatsuo Ishii
[Cc:ed to hackers] (trying select convert(lower(convert('X', 'LATIN1')),'LATIN1','UNICODE');) Ok, this is working now (I cann't reproduce why not at the first time). Good. Is it planned to implement it so that I can write lower()/ upper() for multibyte according to SQL standard (without