On 06/11/2013 06:26 PM, Noah Misch wrote:
As a final counter example, let me note that Postgres itself handles
Unicode escapes differently in UTF8 databases - in other databases it
only accepts Unicode escapes up to U+007f, i.e. ASCII characters.
I don't see a counterexample there; every database that accepts without error
a given Unicode escape produces from it the same text value. The proposal to
which I objected was akin to having non-UTF8 databases silently translate
E'\u0220' to E'\\u0220'.
What?
There will be no silent translation. The only debate here is about how
these databases turn strings values inside a json datum into PostgreSQL
text values via the documented operation of certain functions and
operators. If the JSON datum doesn't already contain a unicode escape
then nothing of what's been discussed would apply. Nothing whatever
that's been proposed would cause a unicode escape sequence to be emitted
that wasn't already there in the first place, and no patch that I have
submitted has contained any escape sequence generation at all.
cheers
andrew
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
