From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Sam Mason <sam(at)samason(dot)me(dot)uk> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Unicode string literals versus the world |
Date: | 2009-04-16 14:54:16 |
Message-ID: | 17658.1239893656@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Sam Mason <sam(at)samason(dot)me(dot)uk> writes:
> I'd never heard of UTF-16 surrogate pairs before this discussion and
> hence didn't realise that it's valid to have a surrogate pair in place
> of a single code point. The docs say that <D800 DF02> corresponds to
> U+10302, Python would appear to follow my intuitions in that:
> ord(u'\uD800\uDF02')
> results in an error instead of giving back 66306, as I'd expect. Is
> this a bug in Python, my understanding, or something else?
I might be wrong, but I think surrogate pairs are expressly forbidden in
all representations other than UTF16/UCS2. We definitely forbid them
when validating UTF-8 strings --- that's per an RFC recommendation.
It sounds like Python is doing the same.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | David Fetter | 2009-04-16 15:21:38 | Re: [GENERAL] Performance of full outer join in 8.3 |
Previous Message | mito | 2009-04-16 14:52:24 | Re: Postgres SQL specification (tests) |