Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] Bug #659: lower()/upper() bug on

2002-06-12 Thread Enke, Michael
Tatsuo Ishii wrote: > > > > > > There are "full width alphabets" in Japanese. Thoes include not only > > > > > ASCII letters but also some European characters. > > > > > > > > Are these ASCII and European characters uppercased in some > > > > Japanese-specific way ? > > > > > > Probably not, but

Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] Bug #659: lower()/upper() bug on

2002-05-20 Thread Tatsuo Ishii
> > > > There are "full width alphabets" in Japanese. Thoes include not only > > > > ASCII letters but also some European characters. > > > > > > Are these ASCII and European characters uppercased in some > > > Japanese-specific way ? > > > > Probably not, but I'm not sure since my Linux box does

Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] Bug #659: lower()/upper() bug on

2002-05-17 Thread Enke, Michael
Tatsuo Ishii wrote: > > > > Are you sure that say, de_DE.utf8 locale produce meaningful results > > > for any other languages? > > > > there are often subtle differences, but upper() and lower() are much > > more likely to produce right results than collation order or date/money > > formats. > >

Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] Bug #659: lower()/upper() bug on

2002-05-14 Thread Tatsuo Ishii
> > Are you sure that say, de_DE.utf8 locale produce meaningful results > > for any other languages? > > there are often subtle differences, but upper() and lower() are much > more likely to produce right results than collation order or date/money > formats. > > in fact seem to be only 10 distin

Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] Bug #659: lower()/upper() bug on

2002-05-14 Thread Hannu Krosing
On Tue, 2002-05-14 at 09:52, Tatsuo Ishii wrote: > > Are you sure that say, de_DE.utf8 locale produce meaningful results > for any other languages? there are often subtle differences, but upper() and lower() are much more likely to produce right results than collation order or date/money formats

Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] Bug #659: lower()/upper() bug on

2002-05-14 Thread Tatsuo Ishii
> > My Linux box does not have *.utf8 locales at all. Probably not so many > > platforms have them up to now, I guess. > > What linux do you use ? Kind of variant of RH6.2. > At least newer Redhat Linuxen have them and I suspect that all newer > glibc's are capable of using them. I guess many

Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] Bug #659: lower()/upper() bug on

2002-05-14 Thread Hannu Krosing
On Tue, 2002-05-14 at 03:29, Tatsuo Ishii wrote: > > I think it is really not hard to do this for UTF-8. I don't have to know the > > relation between the locale and the encoding. Look at this: > > We can use the LC_CTYPE from pg_controldata or alternatively the LC_CTYPE > > at server startup. For

Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] Bug #659: lower()/upper() bug on

2002-05-13 Thread Jean-Michel POURE
Le Mardi 14 Mai 2002 03:29, Tatsuo Ishii a écrit : > For example, user > might want to have a table like this in a UTF-8 database: > > create table t1( >english text,-- English message >germany text,-- Germany message >japanese text-- Japanese message > ); Or j

Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] Bug #659: lower()/upper() bug on

2002-05-13 Thread Tatsuo Ishii
> I think it is really not hard to do this for UTF-8. I don't have to know the > relation between the locale and the encoding. Look at this: > We can use the LC_CTYPE from pg_controldata or alternatively the LC_CTYPE > at server startup. For nearly every locale (de_DE, ja_JP, ...) there exists > a

Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] Bug #659: lower()/upper() bug on ->multibyte<- DB

2002-05-13 Thread Enke, Michael
Tatsuo Ishii wrote: > > [Cc:ed to hackers] > > (trying select convert(lower(convert('X', 'LATIN1')),'LATIN1','UNICODE');) > > > Ok, this is working now (I cann't reproduce why not at the first time). > > Good. > > > Is it planned to implement it so that I can write lower()/ upper() for multib

Re: [HACKERS] [BUGS] Bug #659: lower()/upper() bug on ->multibyte<- DB

2002-05-10 Thread Tatsuo Ishii
[Cc:ed to hackers] (trying select convert(lower(convert('X', 'LATIN1')),'LATIN1','UNICODE');) > Ok, this is working now (I cann't reproduce why not at the first time). Good. > Is it planned to implement it so that I can write lower()/ upper() for multibyte > according to SQL standard (without