Re: patch adding new regexp functions

Am Freitag, 16. Februar 2007 08:02 schrieb Jeremy Drake:
> On Thu, 15 Feb 2007, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > I have no strong opinion about how matches are returned.  Seeing the
> > definitional difficulties that you point out, it may be fine to return
> > them unordered.  But then all "matches" functions should do that.
> >
> > For the "split" functions, however, providing the order is clearly
> > important.
>
> Does this version sufficiently address your concerns?

I don't think anyone asked for the start position and length in the result of
regexp_split().  The result should be an array of text.  That is what Perl et
al. do.

As for the regexp_matches() function, it seems to me that it returns too much
information at once.  What is the use case for getting all of prematch,
fullmatch, matches, and postmatch in one call?

--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/