Re: anyarray
От | Andrew Dunstan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: anyarray |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 54F85BDD.8010305@dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: anyarray (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 03/04/2015 10:28 PM, Tom Lane wrote: > Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes: >> On 2/13/15 10:20 AM, Teodor Sigaev wrote: >>> Some of users of intarray contrib module wish to use its features with >>> another kind of arrays, not only for int4 type. Suggested module >>> generalizes intarray over other (not all) types op pgsql. >> I think this module should be merged with the intarray module. Having >> two modules with very similar functionality would be confusing. > Perhaps. I think it would be hard to remove intarray without breaking > things for existing users of it; even if the functionality remains under > another name. And surely we don't want to generalize intarray while > keeping that same name. So it might be hard to get to a clean solution. > > Speaking of names, I can't avoid the feeling that it is a seriously bad > idea to name an extension the same thing as an existing core type. > > +1. We have far too much experience already of this type of naming confusion. cheers andrew
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: