Re: patch: to_string, to_array functions

On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 9:39 AM, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> It was discussed before. I would to see some symmetry in names.

That's reasonable.

> The
> bad thing is so great names like string_to_array and array_to_string
> is used,

Yeah, those names are not too good.

> and second bad thing was done three years ago when nobody
> thinking about NULL values. I don't think, so we are able to repair
> older functions - simply the default behave isn't optimal.

This is a matter of opinion, but certainly it's not right for everyone.

> I am thinking so we have to do decision about string_to_array and
> array_to_string deprecation first. If these function will be
> deprecated, then we can use a similar names (and probably we should to
> use a similar names) - so text_to_array or array_to_string can be
> acceptable. If not, then this discus is needless - then to_string and
> to_array have to be maximally in contrib - stringfunc is good idea -
> and maybe we don't need thinking about new names.

Well, -1 from me for deprecating string_to_array and array_to_string.

I am not in favor of the names to_string and to_array even if we put
them in contrib, though. The problem with string_to_array and
array_to_string is that they aren't descriptive enough, and
to_string/to_array is even less so.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise Postgres Company