Reinier Olislagers schrieb:
On 16/07/2013 17:18, Hans-Peter Diettrich wrote:
Reinier Olislagers schrieb:
On 15-7-2013 18:43, Hans-Peter Diettrich wrote:
Reinier Olislagers schrieb:
On 14-7-2013 8:00, Daniel Simoes de Ameida wrote:
Workaround: make your field size as large as the maximum number of UTF8
bytes you expect.
Another workaround: use the appropriate codepage for storing strings in
the database, so that all characters are single bytes. With the new
(encoded) AnsiStrings this should be quite easy (automatic conversion).
Wouldn't you run into trouble if you want to use a character outside the
codepage? Presumably OP has enabled UTF8 on the db instead of some other
codepage on purpose.
Then the choice of byte sized characters in the DB field is
inappropriate at all. I wonder how the DB or SQL would sort or compare
(LIKE) such strings?
No it isn't. Why shouldn't a user be able to enter Chinese, Greek,
Cyrillic and Latin characters?
Then such characters either must be understood properly by the DB, or
the DB must not care about such data at all.
As for sorting etc, there are various unicode collation standards.
A DB implementing these standards has to offer Unicode fields in the
first place.
DoDi
--
_______________________________________________
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lists.lazarus.freepascal.org
http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
