Re: proposal: searching in array function - array_position

On 1/27/15 4:36 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> 2015-01-26 23:29 GMT+01:00 Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com <mailto:Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>>:
>
> On 1/26/15 4:17 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>
> Any way to reduce the code duplication between the array and non-array versions? Maybe factor out the operator caching code?
>
>
> I though about it - but there is different checks, different result processing, different result type.
>
> I didn't find any readable and reduced form :(
>
>
> Yeah, that's why I was thinking specifically of the operator caching code... isn't that identical? That would at least remove a dozen lines...
>
>
> It is only partially identical - I would to use cache for array_offset, but it is not necessary for array_offsets .. depends how we would to modify current API to support externally cached data.

Externally cached data?
--
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com