Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>> Instead of the code point, I'd prefer the actual encoding of
>> the character as argument to chr() and return value of ascii().
>
> And frankly, I don't know how to do it sanely anyway. A character
> encoding has a fixed byte pattern, but a given byte pattern
> doesn't have
> a single universal number value. I really don't think we want to have
> the value of chr(n) depend on the endianness of the machine, do we?
>
> The reason we are prepared to make an exception for Unicode
> is precisely because the code point maps to an encoding
> pattern independently of architecture, ISTM.
Point taken.
I only wanted to make sure that there are good reasons to
differ from Oracle.
Oracle's chr() is big-endian on all platforms, BTW.
Yours,
Laurenz Albe
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?
http://archives.postgresql.org
