Re: [HACKERS] Implications of multi-byte support in a distribution

> But we can't avoid calling strcoll() and some other codes surrounded
> by #ifdef LOCALE? I think he actually wants is to define his own
> collation *and* not to use locale if the column is ASCII only.

Right. But there would be a fundamental character type which is *not*
locale-aware, and there is another type (perhaps/probably NCHAR?)
which is...

> Ok, what about throwing away #ifdef
> LOCALE? Same thing can be obtained by defining a special callation
> LOCALE_AWARE.

Or moving the locale-aware stuff to a formal NCHAR implementation.
istm (and to Date and Darwen ;) that there is a tighter relationship
between collations, character repertoires, and character sets than
might be inferred from the SQL92-defined capabilities.

> This seems much more consistent for me.  Or even better,
> we could explicitly have predefined COLLATION for each language (these
> can be automatically generated from existing locale data). This would
> avoid some platform specific locale problems.

Right. We may already have some of this with the "implicit type
coersion" conventions I introduced in the v6.4 release.
                      - Thomas

-- 
Thomas Lockhart                lockhart@alumni.caltech.edu
South Pasadena, California