| From: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Brendan Jurd <direvus(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: patch: to_string, to_array functions |
| Date: | 2010-08-09 20:34:39 |
| Message-ID: | D3A77865-D55C-42F6-BB5F-7907AB78B765@kineticode.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Aug 9, 2010, at 1:10 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> My first thought is that we should go back to the string_to_array and
>> array_to_string names. The key reason not to use those names was the
>> conflict with the old functions if you didn't specify a third argument,
>> but where is the advantage of not specifying the third argument? It
>> would be a lot simpler for people to understand if we just said "the
>> two-argument forms work like this, while the three-argument forms work
>> like that". This is especially reasonable because the difference in
>> behavior is about nulls in the array, which is exactly what the third
>> argument exists to specify.
>>
>> [ Sorry for not complaining about this before, but I was on vacation
>> when the previous naming discussion went on. ]
>
> I can live with that, as long as it's clearly explained in the docs.
+1
David
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Merlin Moncure | 2010-08-09 20:40:53 | Re: patch: to_string, to_array functions |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-08-09 20:34:16 | Re: patch: to_string, to_array functions |