Re: UTF8 with BOM support in psql - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Andrew Dunstan
Subject Re: UTF8 with BOM support in psql
Date
Msg-id 4ADF07C7.3000608@dunslane.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: UTF8 with BOM support in psql  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
List pgsql-hackers

Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-10-21 at 13:11 +0900, Itagaki Takahiro wrote:
>   
>> The attached patch replace BOM with while spaces, but it does not
>> change client encoding automatically. I think we can always ignore
>> client encoding at the replacement because SQL command cannot start
>> with BOM sequence. If we don't ignore the sequence, execution of
>> the script must fail with syntax error.
>>     
>
> I feel that psql is the wrong place to fix this.  BOMs in UTF-8 should
> be ignored everywhere, all the time.
>
>   

I suggest you re-read the Unicode FAQ on the subject.  That is not the 
conclusion I came to after I read it. Quite the reverse in fact.

cheers

andrew


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Thom Brown
Date:
Subject: Re: \du quite ugly in 8.4
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Could regexp_matches be immutable?