From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: json api WIP patch |
Date: | 2013-01-02 22:51:50 |
Message-ID: | 50E4BA06.5040608@dunslane.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 01/02/2013 04:45 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 26, 2012 at 3:33 PM, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> wrote:
>> Here is a patch for the first part of the JSON API that was recently
>> discussed. It includes the json parser hook infrastructure and functions
>> for json_get and friends, plus json_keys.
>>
>> As is, this exposes the json lexer fully for use by the hook functions. But
>> I could easily be persuaded that this should be an opaque structure with
>> some constructor and getter functions - I don't think the hook functions
>> need or should be able to set anything in the lexer.
>>
>> Work is proceeding on some of the more advanced functionality discussed.
> This seems to contain a large number of spurious whitespace changes.
I'm glad you're looking at it :-)
I did do a run of pgindent on the changed files before I cut the patch,
which might have made some of those changes.
I notice a couple of other infelicities too, which are undoubtedly my fault.
The original prototype of this was cut against some older code, and I
then tried to merge it with the current code base, and make sure that
all the regression tests passed. That might well have resulted in a
number of things that need review.
>
> And maybe some other spurious changes. For example, I'm not sure why
> this comment is truncated:
>
>
Another good question.
I'll make another pass over this and try to remove some of what's
annoying you.
cheers
andrew
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2013-01-02 22:51:55 | Re: proposal: ANSI SQL 2011 syntax for named parameters |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2013-01-02 22:36:33 | Re: multiple CREATE FUNCTION AS items for PLs |