Martijn van Oosterhout wrote:
On Tue, Dec 18, 2007 at 10:35:39AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Martijn van Oosterhout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Ok, but that doesn't apply in this case, his database appears to be
LATIN1 and this character is valid for that encoding...
You know what, I think the test in the code is backwards.
is_mb = pg_encoding_max_length(encoding) > 1;
if ((is_mb && (cvalue > 255)) || (!is_mb && (cvalue > 127)))
Yes.
It does seem to be a bit wierd. For single character encodings anything
up to 255 is OK, well, sort of. It depends on what you want chr() to do
(oh no, not this discussion again). If you subscribe to the idea that
it should use unicode code points then the test is completely bogus,
since whether or not the character is valid has nothing to with whether
the encoding is multibyte or not.
We are certainly not going to revisit that discussion at this stage. It
was thrashed out months ago.
If you want the output of th chr() to (logically) depend on the encoding
then the test makes more sense, but ten it's inverted. Single-byte
encodings are by definition defined to 255 characters. And multibyte
encodings (other than UTF-8 I suppose) can only see the ASCII subset.
Right. There is a simple thinko on my part in the line of code Tom
pointed to, which needs to be fixed.
cheers
andrew
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?
http://archives.postgresql.org/
