| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: RfD: more powerful "any" types |
| Date: | 2009-09-10 19:00:35 |
| Message-ID: | 6463.1252609235@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> 2009/9/10 Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>:
>> I think the point of it is that people are used to how sprintf works.
>> So it should work as nearly like sprintf as possible.
> How sprintf will be print bytea type, or char(n) type values?
Well, that's why it requires some actual thought and agreement on a
specification --- sprintf just crashes on type mismatches, but perhaps
the SQL version should be smarter. You shouldn't expect that the
easiest thing to throw together is going to be considered the most
desirable solution.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2009-09-10 19:05:36 | Re: RfD: more powerful "any" types |
| Previous Message | Kevin Grittner | 2009-09-10 18:53:07 | Re: RfD: more powerful "any" types |