From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | "Meredith L(dot) Patterson" <mlp(at)osogato(dot)com> |
Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Unicode string literals versus the world |
Date: | 2009-04-14 19:27:29 |
Message-ID: | 17372.1239737249@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Meredith L. Patterson" <mlp(at)osogato(dot)com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> I suspect that it's actually impossible to parse such a thing correctly
>> without a full-fledged flex lexer or something of equivalent complexity.
> Is there a reason not to use a full-fledged flex lexer?
The point is that that's a pretty large imposition on client code that
we don't control or maintain, in order to get a feature that could be
gotten in much less dangerous ways that don't impact any code outside
PG.
> I'd be willing to take a crack at such a thing, but I'm working 80-hour
> weeks through the end of June and likely wouldn't be able to put in any
> time on it till then. So I definitely couldn't promise anything for 8.4,
> but if putting it off till 8.5 works, sign me up.
Shall we pass your name on to every package using Postgres, then? This
is *not* about code within Postgres.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Meredith L. Patterson | 2009-04-14 19:39:41 | Re: Unicode string literals versus the world |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2009-04-14 19:23:37 | Re: Unicode string literals versus the world |