Re: json accessors

On 12/05/2012 01:48 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote:
>> I'm sorry what I have offered isn't what you want, but plenty of other people have told me it will go a long way
meetingtheir needs. 
> *Sigh.* I guess I have not been clear.
>
> The stuff you propose is *awesome*. I love it. The syntax with the chaining operators warms my heart, and I can’t
waitto make *extensive* use of it in my procedural code. Maybe I would never *need* to do column queries of JSON
contentsoften enough to require an expensive index. 


OK, sorry if I misunderstood. I guess I'm trying pretty hard to
concentrate on what can be accomplished now, and other people are
talking about blue sky possibilities.


>
> So I'm happy with this stuff, as long as it does not get in the way of supporting indexing at some point in the
future.I can’t wait to start using it! 

I don't see why it should get in the way of anything like that. If
anything, the parser design changes I have proposed should make later
development much easier.


cheers

andrew