Re: More char()/ascii()

Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
>> Fixing it would be trivial, I'm sure, but is it really a problem?

> The "char" data type which I was mistakenly using is enough of a wart that it
> probably doesn't matter what we do with it. There aren't any security holes
> with the current behaviour (I don't think).

The "char" type seems to be partly intended to serve as a poor man's
int1 --- at one time it even had arithmetic operators, if memory serves.
So we shouldn't disallow zero or mess with the fact that it's a signed
rather than unsigned byte.

regards, tom lane