+1 for such a feature, simply to avoid the need of
writing a hstore-parser (which wasn't too bad
to write, but it felt unnecessary). Doesn't
matter to me if it's hstore-to-json or hstore-to-xml
or hstore-to-yaml. Just something that parsers are
readily available for.
Heck, I wouldn't mind if hstore moved to using any one
of those for it's external representations by default.
Tom Lane wrote:
> a ton of special syntax for xml support, ...a json type...
> [ I can already hear somebody insisting on a yaml type :-( ]
If these were CPAN-like installable modules, I'd hope
there would be eventually. Don't most languages and
platforms have both YAML and JSON libraries? Yaml's
user-defined types are an example of where this might
be useful eventually.
Tom Lane wrote:
> Well, actually, now that you mention it: how much of a json type would
> be duplicative of the xml stuff? Would it be sufficient to provide
> json <-> xml converters and let the latter type do all the heavy lifting?
I imagine eventually a JSON type could validate fields using
JSON Schema. But that's drifting away from hstore.
> (If so, this patch ought to be hstore_to_xml instead.)
Doesn't matter to me so long as it's any format with readily
available parsers.