On 2 Apr 2012, at 7:25pm, Richard Hipp <d...@sqlite.org> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 2:03 PM, Simon Slavin <slav...@bigfraud.org> wrote: > >> I think ... a higher priority than that would be handling Unicode >> correctly. And having Unicode support would be useful in writing the code >> which handles dates. > > size of SQLite library: approx 500 KB > size of ICU library: approx 21,919 KB > > The ICU library (needed to handle Unicode "correctly") is over 40x larger > than SQLite. Can you understand then why we don't want to make SQLite > dependent upon ICU?
Yep. That's why you don't do it. And handling other things to make data human-readable using Unicode characters would be wrong too. Simon. _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@sqlite.org http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
