Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> [ I can already hear somebody insisting on a yaml type :-( ]
> Now that's a case where I think a couple of converter functions at most
> should meet the need.
Well, actually, now that you mention it: how much of a json type would
be duplicative of the xml stuff? Would it be sufficient to provide
json <-> xml converters and let the latter type do all the heavy lifting?
(If so, this patch ought to be hstore_to_xml instead.)
regards, tom lane