On Wed, 2007-10-03 at 22:57 +0200, Markus Gritsch wrote: > On 10/3/07, Markus Gritsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 10/3/07, David Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I was thinking that it might make more sense to just remove that whole > > > section. I understand that whoever wrote that code thought it was > > > necessary to convert to Unicode, but I think it is not. Can you comment > > > on this idea? > > > > There was a thread on this list containing an example which breaks > > without the conversion and runs fine with it. > > http://www.mail-archive.com/sqlobject-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net/msg02607.html
This appears to be an example which breaks when you convert a unicode string to unicode. I was proposing removing the conversion altogether, which would avoid the problem you mentioned in the first message. If I do this, your test still passes. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ _______________________________________________ sqlobject-discuss mailing list sqlobject-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sqlobject-discuss
