From: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Steve Crawford <scrawford(at)pinpointresearch(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] string_to_array with empty input |
Date: | 2009-03-31 04:21:29 |
Message-ID: | 1E6E35DF-4260-4559-8E68-3A7775A2D324@kineticode.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
On Mar 30, 2009, at 8:26 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Does anyone want to argue for keeping it the same? Or perhaps
> argue that a zero-element array is a more sensible result than
> a one-element array with one empty string? (It doesn't seem
> like it to me, but maybe somebody thinks so.)
Hrm. There seems to be some disagreement about this among some
languages:
% perl -le '@r = split /-/, ""; print length @r; print qq{"$r[0]"}'
1
""
% irb
>> puts ''.split('-')
=> nil
So Perl returns a single element as Steve had been expecting, while
Ruby returns nil. I'm used to the Perl way, but I guess there's room
for various interpretations, including the current implementation,
with which Ruby would seem to agree.
Best,
David
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Stuart Bishop | 2009-03-31 04:26:24 | Re: pgstattuple triggered checkpoint failure and database outage? |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-03-31 04:20:20 | Re: [GENERAL] pgstattuple triggered checkpoint failure and database outage? |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2009-03-31 04:22:55 | Re: can't load plpython |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-03-31 04:20:20 | Re: [GENERAL] pgstattuple triggered checkpoint failure and database outage? |