-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Fri, Mar 16, 2007 at 09:56:23AM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> tomas@tuxteam.de wrote:
> >
> >>Does hstore nest? [...]
> >
> >If what you mean is to have "mappings of mappings" then no.
> > [...] think "hash" for perl folks [...]
> As a perl folk I think of hashes as nestable :-)
Heh. Point taken :-)
> Anyway, this means that you can't use hstore to cover the same field as
> YAML or JSON. That doesn't mean it's not useful - far from it.
I think that hstore might be extensible in this direction. After all,
the keys and (key, value) combinations just get hashed into a bitmap.
There is no reason why one shouldn't be able to hash more complex data
structures (unless, of course, the bit map gets so densely poked with
ones that it stops being useful). The difficult part might be to reach a
consensus on what a "complex data structure" might look like.
The purists among the relational folks are sharpening their knives
already, I can hear that ;-)
Regards
- -- tomás
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFF++GaBcgs9XrR2kYRAs/hAJ9vfRy36T23vJ6eIYj6efrQVk9roQCeMkqQ
kWqzNbgbkMOXKIDQuzwDeFY=
=fCiG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----