Re: proposal: unescape_text function

On 12/2/20 1:30 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> st 2. 12. 2020 v 11:37 odesílatel Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com 
>     st 2. 12. 2020 v 9:23 odesílatel Peter Eisentraut
> 
>         Heh.  The fact that there is a table of two dozen possible
>         representations kind of proves my point that we should be
>         deliberate in
>         picking one.
> 
>         I do see Oracle unistr() on that list, which appears to be very
>         similar
>         to what you are trying to do here.  Maybe look into aligning
>         with that.
> 
>     unistr is a primitive form of proposed function.  But it can be used
>     as a base. The format is compatible with our  "4.1.2.3. String
>     Constants with Unicode Escapes".
> 
>     What do you think about the following proposal?
> 
>     1. unistr(text) .. compatible with Postgres unicode escapes - it is
>     enhanced against Oracle, because Oracle's unistr doesn't support 6
>     digits unicodes.
> 
>     2. there can be optional parameter "prefix" with default "\". But
>     with "\u" it can be compatible with Java or Python.
> 
>     What do you think about it?
> 
> I thought about it a little bit more, and  the prefix specification has 
> not too much sense (more if we implement this functionality as function 
> "unistr"). I removed the optional argument and renamed the function to 
> "unistr". The functionality is the same. Now it supports Oracle 
> convention, Java and Python (for Python UXXXXXXXX) and \+XXXXXX. These 
> formats was already supported.The compatibility witth Oracle is nice.

Peter, it looks like Pavel has aligned this function with unistr() as 
you suggested. Thoughts?

Regards,
-- 
-David
david@pgmasters.net