Re: Initial review of xslt with no limits patch
От | David E. Wheeler |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Initial review of xslt with no limits patch |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 6C783A4D-A729-44B5-97D5-1A5192F70961@kineticode.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Initial review of xslt with no limits patch (Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Initial review of xslt with no limits patch
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Aug 6, 2010, at 10:15 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote: >> This is not exactly without precedent, either: our built-in xpath() >> function appears to use precisely this approach for its namespace-list >> argument. > > it's one variant, but isn't perfect > > a) it expects so key and value are literals Huh? You can select into an array: try=# create table foo(k text, v text); CREATE TABLE try=# insert into foo values ('foo', 'bar'), ('baz', 'yow'); INSERT 0 2 try=# select ARRAY[k,v] FROM foo; array -----------{foo,bar}{baz,yow} (2 rows) try=# select ARRAY(SELECT ARRAY[k,v] FROM foo); ERROR: could not find array type for datatype text[] Okay, so nested arrays are harder. > b) it expects so all values has same types - what is usually what we > need, but not necessary The XML interface converts them all to text anyway, no? > c) isn't too readable - I am sorry so I am repeating - it is same > reason, why people will prefer a VARIADIC function before function > with array - but I can accept, so this is my view of world I agree that it's not as sugary as pairs would be. But I admit to having no problem with SELECT foo(ARRAY[ ['foo', 'bar'], ['baz', 'yow']]); But maybe I'm biased, since there's a lot of that sort of syntax in pgTAP. Best, David
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: