| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Jeremy Schneider <schneider(at)ardentperf(dot)com>, Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>, Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Update Unicode data to Unicode 16.0.0 |
| Date: | 2025-03-18 18:58:05 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoYKp+CLZhab6fGri3XGhhn5WXs2qVyyo6gFkzP=cRWXjg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 2:55 PM Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com> wrote:
> Continuing on with Unicode 15.1 and accepting the unassigned code point
> *cannot* prevent breakage.
Under your definition, this is true, but I think Jeremy would define
breakage differently. His primary concern, I expect, is *stability*.
Breakage means that the same supposedly-stable results return
different answers on the same data. Under that definition, continuing
under Unicode 15.1 does prevent breakage.
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Álvaro Herrera | 2025-03-18 19:03:30 | Re: NOT ENFORCED constraint feature |
| Previous Message | Jeff Davis | 2025-03-18 18:54:46 | Re: Update Unicode data to Unicode 16.0.0 |