| From: | Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: string function - "format" function proposal |
| Date: | 2010-10-15 00:52:09 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTimsOHDD8Pc6MXsRXQY8+CsjzJ6EcVFD8tuh4sFV@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 9:50 PM, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> wrote:
> They're both somewhat arcane. But I think the C syntax is likely to be more
> familiar to a wider group of users (including, for example, perl hackers)
> than the C# syntax, and is to be preferred on those grounds alone.
OK, probably C syntax is the best design.
Then, let's merge format() and substitute() in the latest patch.
I have a comment about %i for identifier format. %i is also used in
printf(), so it would be better to choose another character, like %I.
(%l is ok, but would be %L if we choose %I.)
Implementation for sprintf() in strincfunc might not be used now,
but it will be a conflict when we also merge it to format() in the future.
--
Itagaki Takahiro
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Hitoshi Harada | 2010-10-15 00:53:54 | Re: UNION DISTINCT in doc |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2010-10-15 00:44:55 | Re: FreeBSD 8.0 i386, plpythonu, threaded Python not supported on this platform |