Subject | Re: [Firebird-Architect] Re: The Wolf on Firebird 3 |
---|---|
Author | Jim Starkey |
Post date | 2005-11-03T15:43:40Z |
Alex Peshkov wrote:
UTF-8 strings. Any UDF expecting and receiving ASCII will work just
fine. And UDF depending solely on string length or string termination
will probably work just fine as well. For most string processing UTF-8
and ascii are interchangeable. The only sticking points is where the
code makes an assumption concerning the number glyphs vs. the number of
bytes, something that doesn't happen often in database functions.
--
Jim Starkey
Netfrastructure, Inc.
978 526-1376
>What should happen with old UDFs, that use ASCII strings?Ascii is the lower 7 bits of Unicode, so all ascii strings are valid
>
>
>
>
>
UTF-8 strings. Any UDF expecting and receiving ASCII will work just
fine. And UDF depending solely on string length or string termination
will probably work just fine as well. For most string processing UTF-8
and ascii are interchangeable. The only sticking points is where the
code makes an assumption concerning the number glyphs vs. the number of
bytes, something that doesn't happen often in database functions.
--
Jim Starkey
Netfrastructure, Inc.
978 526-1376