[unixODBC-support] Length semantics

Nick Gorham nick.gorham at easysoft.com
Fri May 12 15:34:23 BST 2006


Bill Medland wrote:

>On May 10, 2006 11:19 pm, Nick Gorham wrote:
>  
>
>>Vivekanand wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>Nick,
>>>
>>>Thanks. I went through link you suggested and the article at
>>>http://support.microsoft.com/kb/294169/en-us. I have some
>>>more queries.
>>>      
>>>
>
>  
>
>>Thats why utf8 type unicode is a non started with ODBC, AFAIK,
>>MS's view of UNICODE is 16 bit, and thats it, no surrogate
>>pairs.
>>    
>>
>
>I don't think so, at least not these days.  Check out 
>http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/intl/unicode_192r.asp
>
>  
>
Sorry, I should have been more specific, their view of UNICODE with 
respect to ODBC is 16 bit only, its not UTF-16 AFAIK.

Agreed they use different encoding elsewhere.

Or they could have changed their minds again, but I can't see how 
variable length coding would work with a C API like ODBC.

-- 
Nick Gorham
Easysoft Limited
http://www.easysoft.com, http://www.unixODBC.org




More information about the unixODBC-support mailing list