On Monday, 13 November 2017, Tom Lane <
tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
Oliver Ford <ojford@gmail.com> writes:
> On Sun, Nov 12, 2017 at 7:00 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> * Don't we need to fix the NUM_L (currency symbol) case in the
>> same manner? (The NUM_D and NUM_S cases are handled in
>> NUM_numpart_from_char and seem ok at a quick glance.)
> Yes you get the same skipping if you do:
> select to_number('12','L99');
> to_number
> -----------
> 2
> However, this case is not as easy to fix as you can't do a simple
> string comparison like with the group separator. The currency symbol
> for the locale can be " " but if we do a comparison, it won't match if
> the symbol specified is "$" or "£" (so will end up missing characters
> at the end of the supplied string). Could we apply the attached patch
> and then put fixing it for currency on the TODO list?
I don't follow your concern? If "$" is not the correct currency
symbol for the locale, we shouldn't accept it as a match to an L format.
Your patch is tightening what we will accept as a match to a G format,
so I don't see why you're concerned about backward compatibility in
one case but not the other.
regards, tom lane
It's a guess as to the likely use case. I would imagine that people are likely to use a currency symbol different from the locale, but unlikely to use a different group separator. Others might have a different opinion though.
