From: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> |
Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: json api WIP patch |
Date: | 2013-01-15 19:47:23 |
Message-ID: | CAHyXU0y6GDcTxqD+jRHJ5M39kNZbDNEUXCA1-Mc_HHbL+ebqhQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 1:04 PM, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 07:52:56PM -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>>
>> On 01/14/2013 07:36 PM, Merlin Moncure wrote:
>> >While testing this I noticed that integer based 'get' routines are
>> >zero based -- was this intentional? Virtually all other aspects of
>> >SQL are 1 based:
>> >
>> >postgres=# select json_get('[1,2,3]', 1);
>> > json_get
>> >----------
>> > 2
>> >(1 row)
>> >
>> >postgres=# select json_get('[1,2,3]', 0);
>> > json_get
>> >----------
>> > 1
>> >(1 row)
>>
>> Yes. it's intentional. SQL arrays might be 1-based by default, but
>> JavaScript arrays are not. JsonPath and similar gadgets treat the
>> arrays as zero-based. I suspect the Json-using community would not
>> thank us for being overly SQL-centric on this - and I say that as
>> someone who has always thought zero based arrays were a major design
>> mistake, responsible for countless off-by-one errors.
>
> Perhaps we could compromise by making arrays 0.5-based.
Well, I'm not prepared to argue with Andrew in this one. It was
surprising behavior to me, but that's sample size one.
merlin
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2013-01-15 19:51:25 | Re: passing diff options to pg_regress |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2013-01-15 19:46:39 | Re: [PERFORM] Slow query: bitmap scan troubles |