On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 4:55 PM, Thomas Munro
<thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 6:54 PM, Michael Paquier
> <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 3:48 PM, Thomas Munro
>> <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 2:40 PM, Michael Paquier
>>> <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 10:42 AM, <ap@zip.com.au> wrote:
>>>>> I think json_object should provide similar output. Consistency is nice
>>>>> aesthetically and as being in line with the principle of least surprise.
>>>>> Its lack may lead to possible unpleasant results if anyone tries to deal
>>>>> with a JSON structure as TEXT (for whatever reason).
>>>>
>>>> That's a debatable point, and as any output is legal json it does not
>>>> actually hurt one way or another. However, as json_object has been
>>>> introduced at the same time as jsonb, I'd tend as well to think that
>>>> consistency is a good idea if possible, see the patch attached.
>>>
>>> (It's a shame that json_build_object and json_object_agg also don't
>>> agree on where to put whitespace...)
>>
>> Right, missed that, as well as json_object_two_arg.
>
> One more difference is that json_object_agg uses "{ " and " }" while
> the other functions use "{" and "}".
OK, that would make the entries generated a bit more compact.. Are
there other opinions on the matter?
--
Michael