Tatsuo Ishii writes:
UTF-8 seems to be the most popular, but even XML standard requires all
compliant implementations to deal with at least both UTF-8 and UTF-16.
I don't think PostgreSQL is going to natively support UTF-16.
At FOSDEM it was claimed that Windows natively uses UCS-2, and
Tom Lane writes:
code is concerned: the regex library actually offers three regex
flavors, advanced, extended, and basic, where extended matches
what we had before (extended and basic correspond to different
levels of the POSIX 1003.2 standard). We just need a way to expose
that knob to the
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane writes:
code is concerned: the regex library actually offers three regex
flavors, advanced, extended, and basic, where extended matches
what we had before (extended and basic correspond to different
levels of the POSIX 1003.2 standard). We
Tatsuo Ishii kirjutas R, 07.02.2003 kell 04:03:
UTF-8 seems to be the most popular, but even XML standard requires all
compliant implementations to deal with at least both UTF-8 and UTF-16.
I don't think PostgreSQL is going to natively support UTF-16.
By natively, do you mean as backend
I have just committed the latest version of Henry Spencer's regex
package (lifted from Tcl 8.4.1) into CVS HEAD. This code is natively
able to handle wide characters efficiently, and so it avoids the
multibyte performance problems recently exhibited by Wade Klaver.
I have not done extensive
On Fri, 7 Feb 2003 00:49, Hannu Krosing wrote:
Tatsuo Ishii kirjutas N, 06.02.2003 kell 17:05:
Perhaps we should not call the encoding UNICODE but UTF8 (which it
really is). UNICODE is a character set which has half a dozen official
encodings and calling one of them UNICODE does not make
On Thu, 2003-02-06 at 13:25, Tatsuo Ishii wrote:
I have just committed the latest version of Henry Spencer's regex
package (lifted from Tcl 8.4.1) into CVS HEAD. This code is natively
able to handle wide characters efficiently, and so it avoids the
multibyte performance problems recently
Perhaps we should not call the encoding UNICODE but UTF8 (which it
really is). UNICODE is a character set which has half a dozen official
encodings and calling one of them UNICODE does not make things very
clear.
Right. Also we perhaps should call LATIN1 or ISO-8859-1 more precisely
way since
Tatsuo Ishii kirjutas N, 06.02.2003 kell 17:05:
Perhaps we should not call the encoding UNICODE but UTF8 (which it
really is). UNICODE is a character set which has half a dozen official
encodings and calling one of them UNICODE does not make things very
clear.
Right. Also we perhaps
Right. Also we perhaps should call LATIN1 or ISO-8859-1 more precisely
way since ISO-8859-1 can be encoded in either 7 bit or 8 bit(we use
this). I don't know what it is called though.
I don't think that calling 8-bit ISO-8859-1 ISO-8859-1 can confuse
anybody, but UCS-2 (ISO-10646-1),
I have just committed the latest version of Henry Spencer's regex
package (lifted from Tcl 8.4.1) into CVS HEAD. This code is natively
able to handle wide characters efficiently, and so it avoids the
multibyte performance problems recently exhibited by Wade Klaver.
I have not done extensive
On Wed, 5 Feb 2003, Tom Lane wrote:
1. There are a couple of minor incompatibilities between the advanced
regex syntax implemented by this package and the syntax handled by our
old code; in particular, backslash is now a special character within
bracket expressions. It seems to me that we'd
set regex_flavor = advanced
set regex_flavor = extended
set regex_flavor = basic
[snip]
Any suggestions about the name of the parameter?
Actually I think 'regex_flavor' sounds fine.
Not more Americanisms in our config files!! :P
Chris
---(end of
Christopher Kings-Lynne kirjutas N, 06.02.2003 kell 03:56:
set regex_flavor = advanced
set regex_flavor = extended
set regex_flavor = basic
[snip]
Any suggestions about the name of the parameter?
Actually I think 'regex_flavor' sounds fine.
Not more Americanisms in our
14 matches
Mail list logo
