Marko Kreen wrote:
> On 4/17/09, Kevin Grittner <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov> wrote:
>
>> Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> wrote:
>> > ISTM that one of the uses of this is to say "store the character
>> > that corresponds to this Unicode code point in whatever the database
>> > encoding is"
>>
>> I would think you're right. As long as the given character is in the
>> user's character set, we should allow it. Presumably we've already
>> confirmed that they have an encoding scheme which allows them to store
>> everything in their character set.
>>
>
> It is probably good idea, but currently I just followed what the U&
> strings do.
>
> I can change my patch to do it, but it is probably more urgent in U&
> case to decide whether they should work in other encodings too.
>
>
Indeed. What does the standard say about the behaviour of U&'' ?
cheers
andrew
