Re: \xDD patch for 7.5devel - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Kurt Roeckx
Subject Re: \xDD patch for 7.5devel
Date
Msg-id 20031105211414.GA21364@ping.be
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: \xDD patch for 7.5devel  (Larry Rosenman <ler@lerctr.org>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 02:47:17PM -0600, Larry Rosenman wrote:
> 
> 
> --On Thursday, November 06, 2003 07:43:07 +1100 Jason Godden 
> <jasongodden@optushome.com.au> wrote:
> 
> >On Thu, 6 Nov 2003 06:25 am, Markus Bertheau wrote:
> >>? ???, 05.11.2003, ? 16:25, Tom Lane ?????:
> >>> > +#define HEXVALUE(c) (((c)>='a') ? ((c)-87) : (((c)>='A') ? ((c)-55)
> >>> > : ((c)-'0')))
> >>>
> >>> This seems excessively dependent on the assumption that the character
> >>> set is ASCII.  Why have you hard-coded numeric equivalents into this
> >>> macro?
> >>
> >>What not ASCII compatible character sets are out there in use still
> >>today?
> >
> EBCDIC as far as I know is still the default on IBM Mainframes (been 5+ 
> years but...).

Linux on the s390, s390x runs in ASCII mode.  MVS, OS/390, z/OS
all use EBCDIC though.

But I don't think it has anything to do with which OS/hardware
you use but rather what charset is used during the communication.
It's probably about the charset that is used to send the "\xDD".
I guess question is that you can assume that that string is
encoded in ASCII.

If this is broken, I'd say that the octal encoding and other
quotes are broken too.



Kurt



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Performance features the 4th
Next
From: Kurt Roeckx
Date:
Subject: Re: Performance features the 4th