Re: Unicode string literals versus the world

On Tuesday 14 April 2009 17:32:00 Tom Lane wrote:
> I admit that the SQL:2008 way also covers Unicode code
> points in identifiers, which we can't emulate without a lexical change;
> but frankly I think the use-case for that is so thin as to be almost
> nonexistent. Who is going to choose identifiers that they cannot easily
> type on their keyboards?

For example, table names are automatically generated, or you write a test case
for weird looking names, or you want to add special characters in an
identifier that will later be displayed somewhere, or in general you are
writing an application for a foreign language.