On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 12:08:37PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Sam Mason <s...@samason.me.uk> writes: > > I've failed to keep up with the discussion so I'm not sure where this > > conversation has got to! Is the consensus for 8.4 to enable SQL2003 > > style U&lit escaped literals if and only if standard_conforming_strings > > is set? > > That was Peter's proposal, and no one's shot a hole in it yet ...
Just noticed that the spec only supports four hex digits; this would imply that support for anything outside the BMP would have to be done by encoding the character as a surrogate pair. If the code doesn't do this already (the original patch didn't seem to) these should be normalised back to a single character in a similar manner to Marko's recent patch[1]. > I think the discussion about whether/how to add a Unicode extension to > E''-style literals is 8.5 material. We are in beta so now is not > the time to add new features, especially ones that weren't even on the > TODO list before. OK, sounds reasonable. -- Sam http://samason.me.uk/ [1] http://archives.postgresql.org//pgsql-hackers/2009-04/msg00904.php -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers