From: | Roland Volkmann <roland(dot)volkmann(at)gmx(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers-win32(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: UNICODE/utf-8 on win32 |
Date: | 2004-12-31 20:26:43 |
Message-ID: | 41D5B603.80800@gmx.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers-win32 |
Hello,
Tom Lane schrieb am 31.12.2004 20:21:
> "Magnus Hagander" <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net> writes:
>
>>We know it's broken and won't be fixed for 8.0.
>
>
>>If we just #ifndef WIN32 the definitions in utils/mb/encnames.c it won't
>>be possible to select that encoding, right? Will that have any other
>>unwanted effects (such as breaking client encodings)? If not, I suggest
>>this is done.
>
>
> I believe the subscripts in those arrays have to match the encoding
> enum type, so you can't just ifdef out individual entries.
>
>
>>(Or perhaps something can be done in pg_valid_server_encoding?)
>
>
> Making the valid_server_encoding function reject it might work.
> Tatsuo-san would know for sure.
>
> Should we also reject it as a client encoding, or does that work OK?
what ever you will decide to do, please don't reject utf-8 as a valid
client encoding. This would break existing applications in our company,
and I'm sure, not only there.
With best regards,
Roland.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tatsuo Ishii | 2005-01-01 00:10:12 | Re: UNICODE/utf-8 on win32 |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2004-12-31 19:21:16 | Re: UNICODE/utf-8 on win32 |