Looking at 0001 now.
I noticed that it adds JSON, JSON_SCALAR and JSON_SERIALIZE as reserved
keywords to doc/src/sgml/keywords/sql2016-02-reserved.txt; but those
keywords do not appear in the 2016 standard as reserved. I see that
those keywords appear as reserved in sql2023-02-reserved.txt, so I
suppose you're covered as far as that goes; you don't need to patch
sql2016, and indeed that's the wrong thing to do.
I see that you add json_returning_clause_opt, but we already have
json_output_clause_opt. Shouldn't these two be one and the same?
I think the new name is more sensible than the old one, since the
governing keyword is RETURNING; I suppose naming it "output" comes from
the fact that the standard calls this <JSON output clause>.
typo "requeted"
I'm not in love with the fact that JSON and JSONB have pretty much
parallel type categorizing functionality. It seems entirely artificial.
Maybe this didn't matter when these were contained inside each .c file
and nobody else had to deal with that, but I think it's not good to make
this an exported concept. Is it possible to do away with that? I mean,
reduce both to a single categorization enum, and a single categorization
API. Here you have to cast the enum value to int in order to make
ExecInitExprRec work, and that seems a bit lame; moreso when the
"is_jsonb" is determined separately (cf. ExecEvalJsonConstructor)
In the 2023 standard, JSON_SCALAR is just
<JSON scalar> ::= JSON_SCALAR <left paren> <value expression> <right paren>
but we seem to have added a <JSON output format> clause to it. Should
we really?
--
Álvaro Herrera Breisgau, Deutschland — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
"Entristecido, Wutra (canción de Las Barreras)
echa a Freyr a rodar
y a nosotros al mar"