Syntactic Confectionery Delight | |
PerlMonks |
comment on |
( [id://3333]=superdoc: print w/replies, xml ) | Need Help?? |
Jim, Thank you for you input. You seem to know quite a bit about Unicode. What I tried to ask in the original post was why 'use Unicode::Collate;' changed the meaning of characters 0..31? Everything I have read, talked about not changing the meaning of 7bit ASCII. History of the question: I don't know if you are familiar with the NoSQL database engine BerkeleyDB (now owned by Oracle), but I have written a pure perl replacement that performs as well. In some cases where the data portion of the key/value pair are very large, it outperforms BerkeleyDB. Most people on this forum, believe that BerkeleyDB is free. Oracle has added some conditions that make it very expensive( our law firm's counsel ). One example: If a company employee downloads BerkeleyDB and installs it, that's okay. But as a software vendor, if I download it and install it, the company owes Oracle a fee based on number of cores and type of box. For a power7 IBM p-series with 32 cores, the license fee is $ 48,000. for the "free" BerkeleyDB. Most of our products sell for under $ 5,000. Hard to ask a company to pay an additional $48K. Since the PurePerlDB already exists, I was looking at adding a feature to use Unicode::Collate, but it broke other features of PurePerlDB. Unfortunately, my only solution now was to put the burden on the software developer to handle Unicode and duplicates, which is the same as BerkeleyDB. Thanks again for your input...Ed "Well done is better than well said." - Benjamin Franklin In reply to Re^4: RFC: Is this the correct use of Unicode::Collate?
by flexvault
|
|