tchrist,
A "common" practice for handling duplicate names in a database is to append non-printable characters after the name, in the order of insertion. This is like using base 32 (numbers 0 to 31 ) for appended characters. This allows duplicates and retains the order of insertion. You don't have a limit since when you fill the first character, you just add another as "\0" and continue from there. That would be broken with Unicode::Collate.
The implication in the article was that you could replace 'sort' with 'Unicode::Collate'.
Thank you
"Well done is better than well said." - Benjamin Franklin
In reply to Re^2: RFC: Is this the correct use of Unicode::Collate?
by flexvault
in thread RFC: Is this the correct use of Unicode::Collate?
by flexvault
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |