Jim Starkey wrote:

>Alex Peshkov wrote:
>
>
>
>>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.
>
>

I'm afraid it's likely to have problems with cyrillic strings. Now they
are stored in single byte format (CP1251). And a lot of UDFs expect
single byte characters. In UTF-8 cyrillic characters are 2-byte.