Re: Proposal: generate_iterator functions

"Merlin Moncure" <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On 10/18/07, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> generate_array_subscripts() maybe?

> array_to_set or array_expand seem a little better imo (shorter, and
> symmetry with array_accum()), unless you want to differentiate between
> internal funcs (array_cat and the like) vs. user funcs.

I don't much like either of those, because they seem misleading:
what I'd expect from a function named that way is that it returns
the *elements* of the array, not their subscripts.

Come to think of it, do we have a way of doing that directly? If you
only care about accessing the array elements, it seems like dealing in
the subscripts is just notational tedium. Perhaps there should be
array_expand(anyarray) returns setof anyelement, in addition to the
subscript generation function.

On the question of being too long, I could live with
generate_subscripts().

regards, tom lane