Re: Further issues with jsonb semantics, documentation

On 06/05/2015 01:39 PM, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 12:10 PM, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)heroku(dot)com> wrote:
>>> But I agree that it's not a great contribution to science, especially since
>>> the index will be applied to the list of elements in the somewhat
>>> counter-intuitive storage order we use, and we could just raise an error if
>>> we try to apply integer delete to an object instead of an array.
>> Cool. Do you want to write a patch, or should I?
>>
>> Also, what about negative array subscripting (making the 9.4-era
>> "operator jsonb -> integer" operator support that for consistency with
>> the new "operator jsonb - integer" operator)? Should I write the
>> patch? Will you commit it if I do?
> Please let me know if you want me to write these two patches.
>

Send the first one, I'm still thinking about the second one.

cheers

andrew