Re: Re: [PATCH] regexp_positions ( string text, pattern text, flags text ) → setof int4range[]

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>
Cc: Joel Jacobson <joel(at)compiler(dot)org>, Mark Dilger <mark(dot)dilger(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Andreas Karlsson <andreas(at)proxel(dot)se>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Gilles Darold <gilles(at)darold(dot)net>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH] regexp_positions ( string text, pattern text, flags text ) → setof int4range[]
Date: 2021-09-01 14:02:51
Message-ID: 2071665.1630504971@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> writes:
>> On 9 Mar 2021, at 20:30, Joel Jacobson <joel(at)compiler(dot)org> wrote:
>> Attached is a patch implementing it this way.

> This patch no longer applies, can you please submit a rebased version?

Also, since 642433707 ("This patch adds new functions regexp_count(),
regexp_instr(), regexp_like(), and regexp_substr(), and extends
regexp_replace() with some new optional arguments") is already in,
we need to think about how this interacts with that. Do we even
still need any more functionality in this area? Should we try to
align the APIs?

Those new function APIs have some Oracle-isms that I don't especially
care for, like use of int for what should be a boolean. Still, users
aren't going to give us a pass for wildly inconsistent APIs just because
some functions came from Oracle and some didn't.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Fujii Masao 2021-09-01 14:15:52 Re: Add statistics refresh materialized view
Previous Message Tom Lane 2021-09-01 13:54:46 Re: dup(0) fails on Ubuntu 20.04 and macOS 10.15 with 13.0