Re: The "char" type versus non-ASCII characters

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: Chapman Flack <chap(at)anastigmatix(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: The "char" type versus non-ASCII characters
Date: 2021-12-03 20:13:24
Message-ID: 2322653.1638562404@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> On 12/3/21 14:42, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Right, I envisioned that ASCII behaves the same but we'd use
>> a numeric representation for high-bit-set values. These
>> cases could be told apart fairly easily by charin(), since
>> the numeric representation would always be three digits.

> OK, this seems the most attractive. Can we also allow 2 hex digits?

I think we should pick one base and stick to it. I don't mind
hex if you have a preference for that.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Kenneth Marshall 2021-12-03 20:17:49 Re: The "char" type versus non-ASCII characters
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2021-12-03 20:11:11 Re: The "char" type versus non-ASCII characters