From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Marko Tiikkaja <marko(at)joh(dot)to>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Add numeric_trim(numeric) |
Date: | 2016-01-07 02:12:12 |
Message-ID: | CA+Tgmoahrc2tX-7eKfxoqSEq0B4dmHTWog7z+Y1FzLt3GQwLPA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 6:51 PM, Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On 6 January 2016 at 20:09, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 10:21 AM, Dean Rasheed <dean(dot)a(dot)rasheed(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>> It seems like a useful function to have, but perhaps it should just be
>>> called trim() rather than numeric_trim(), for consistency with the
>>> names of the other numeric functions, which don't start with
>>> "numeric_".
>>
>> That wouldn't work in this case, because we have hard-coded parser
>> productions for TRIM().
>>
>
> Ah. Good point.
>
> Pity -- I would have liked a nice short name for this, in a similar
> vein to the existing numeric functions.
My experiences with function overloading haven't been enormously
positive - things that we think will work out sometimes don't, a la
the whole pg_size_pretty mess.
In this case, trim(stringy-thingy) and trim(numberish-thingy) aren't
even really doing the same thing, which makes me even less excited
about it.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2016-01-07 02:26:57 | Re: Improving replay of XLOG_BTREE_VACUUM records |
Previous Message | Amit Langote | 2016-01-07 01:39:52 | Re: Comment typo in namespace.c |