Tom Lane wrote:
> AFAICS the only cases that give rise to arrays with lower bounds other
> than one are:
> * direct entry of a literal with explicit lower bound;
> * assignment to a subscript or slice below 1;
> * array_prepend (and the N/N+1-dimension case of array_cat).
>
> I don't think "it's not in the spec" is a reason for rejecting #1 or #2.
> But I agree that there is a reasonable case for modifying array_prepend
> and array_cat so that they won't generate non-spec lower bounds where
> none existed before.
>
> How about changing them so that the lower bound of the right-hand array
> is preserved, rather than decreased by one?
>
That seems reasonable. I'll do it if you'd like...
Joe