On 2023-Jul-18, Amit Langote wrote:
> Attached updated patches. In 0002, I removed the mention of the
> RETURNING clause in the JSON(), JSON_SCALAR() documentation, which I
> had forgotten to do in the last version which removed its support in
> code.
> I think 0001 looks ready to go. Alvaro?
It looks reasonable to me.
> Also, I've been wondering if it isn't too late to apply the following
> to v16 too, so as to make the code look similar in both branches:
Hmm.
> 785480c953 Pass constructName to transformJsonValueExpr()
I think 785480c953 can easily be considered a bugfix on 7081ac46ace8, so
I agree it's better to apply it to 16.
> b6e1157e7d Don't include CaseTestExpr in JsonValueExpr.formatted_expr
I feel a bit uneasy about this one. It seems to assume that
formatted_expr is always set, but at the same time it's not obvious that
it is. (Maybe this aspect just needs some more commentary). I agree
that it would be better to make both branches identical, because if
there's a problem, we are better equipped to get a fix done to both.
As for the removal of makeCaseTestExpr(), I agree -- of the six callers
of makeNode(CastTestExpr), only two of them would be able to use the new
function, so it doesn't look of general enough usefulness.
--
Álvaro Herrera Breisgau, Deutschland — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
Y una voz del caos me habló y me dijo
"Sonríe y sé feliz, podría ser peor".
Y sonreí. Y fui feliz.
Y fue peor.