Re: array functions - request for opinions (was Re: [PATCHES] array

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: array functions - request for opinions (was Re: [PATCHES] array
Дата
Msg-id 2162.1053967200@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: array functions - request for opinions (was Re: [PATCHES]  (Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>)
Ответы Re: array functions - request for opinions (was Re: [PATCHES]  (Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> In both cases I think it's mostly a matter of defining a defensible 
>> behavior, which is probably not that hard, but no one's yet gotten 
>> annoyed enough to try to fix it.

> It is probably easy enough to work around in the array concatenation 
> functions. Would it be defensible to say that ('{}'::int4[] || 2) should 
> produce ('{2}'::int4[]), i.e. a one-dimensional integer array with one 
> element?

You would also have to assume that the subscript lower bound is one,
which doesn't bother me but is an additional bit of state that has to
appear out of nowhere.  (In the assignment case you don't have to assume
that, since the subscript tells you what to do.)
        regards, tom lane


В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Joe Conway
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: array functions - request for opinions (was Re: [PATCHES]
Следующее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Bug(s) or not?