Re: Initial review of xslt with no limits patch

2010/8/6 David E. Wheeler :
> On Aug 6, 2010, at 11:13 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>
>> That would work too, although I think it might be a bit harder to use
>> than one alternating-name-and-value array, at least in some scenarios.
>> You'd have to be careful that you got the values in the same order in
>> both arrays, which'd be easy to botch.
>>
>> There might be other use-cases where two separate arrays are easier
>> to use, but I'm not seeing one offhand.
>
> Stuff like this makes me wish PostgreSQL had an ordered pair data type. Then you'd just have a function with `variadic ordered pair` as the signature.
>

yes it is one a possibility and probably best. The nice of this
variant can be two forms like current variadic does -  foo(.., a :=
10, b := 10) or foo(.., variadic ARRAY[(a,10),(b,10)])



> I don't suppose anyone has implemented a data type like this…
>
> Best,
>
> David
>
>