From: | Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> |
Cc: | Atsushi Ogawa <a_ogawa(at)hi-ho(dot)ne(dot)jp>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org, PG Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] regexp_replace |
Date: | 2005-06-08 17:14:37 |
Message-ID: | 200506081314.37469.xzilla@users.sourceforge.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
On Tuesday 07 June 2005 10:57, David Fetter wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 10:27:28PM +0900, Atsushi Ogawa wrote:
> > My idea is opposite. I think that the regexp_replace() should make
> > "replace all" a default. Because the replace() of pgsql replaces all
> > string, and regexp_replace() of oracle10g is also similar.
>
> I respectfully disagree. Although Oracle does things this way, no
> other regular expression search and replace does. Historically, you
> can find that "Oracle does it this way" is not a reason why we would
> do it. Text editors, programming languages, etc., etc. do "replace
> the first" by default and "replace globally" only when told to.
>
You don't think it will be confusing to have a function called replace which
replaces all occurrences and a function called regex_replace which only
replaces the first occurance? There's something to be said for consitancy
within pgsql itself.
--
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2005-06-08 17:22:30 | Re: The Contrib Roundup (long) |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2005-06-08 16:38:42 | Re: The Contrib Roundup (long) |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2005-06-08 18:45:46 | Re: [HACKERS] regexp_replace |
Previous Message | Federico Di Gregorio | 2005-06-08 16:54:08 | BUG #1707: statistics collector starts with stats_start_collector = false |