This is the mail archive of the glibc-bugs@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

[Bug locale/18927] Different strings should never collate as equal


https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=18927

--- Comment #9 from Egmont Koblinger <egmont at gmail dot com> ---
(In reply to joseph@codesourcery.com from comment #8)
> On Wed, 9 Sep 2015, fweimer at redhat dot com wrote:

> The intent is that, to avoid various surprising effects discussed in those 
> issues (and the previous discussions on the Austin Group mailing list), 
> byte-distinct strings do not collate the same (although if they normalize 
> the same, I'd expect them to collate together relative to all other 
> strings - differences in normalization being of the lowest precedence in 
> collation).

I'd love to see it, this is what this bugreport is about :)

tr10's A.3.2 shows the wrappers that turn a non-deterministic coll/xfrm methods
into deterministic ones - pretty much what I outlined here, although they
forget to mention that SEPARATOR needs to sort before any possible byte within
old_sort_key. The wrapper around strcoll() is more obvious.

The fact that they talk about these wrappers as possible external methods,
rather than having to be build inside the collate implementation, makes me
uncertain whether my request is in align with the standard. (I'm yet to read
the whole docs.)

Btw, a side question: What happens, and what should happen, if the input to
strcoll() or strxfrm() is not valid UTF-8?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]