| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Mike Fowler <mike(at)mlfowler(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: review: xml_is_well_formed |
| Date: | 2010-08-06 20:55:06 |
| Message-ID: | 1281128106.2563.7.camel@vanquo.pezone.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On fre, 2010-08-06 at 14:43 +0100, Mike Fowler wrote:
> > Or perhaps it could return a string instead of a boolean: content,
> > document, or NULL if it's neither.
> >
>
> I like the sound of that. In fact this helps workaround the IS
> DOCUMENT
> and IS CONTENT limitations such that you can you can select only
> content, only documents or both is you use IS NOT NULL.
>
> Unless anyone sees a reason that this function needs to remain a
> boolean function, I'll rework the patch over the weekend.
What is the actual use case for this function? Is the above behavior
actually useful?
One reason to stick with boolean is backward compatibility.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David E. Wheeler | 2010-08-06 20:57:13 | Re: Initial review of xslt with no limits patch |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2010-08-06 20:52:36 | Re: review: xml_is_well_formed |