Re: [PATCH] Exorcise "zero-dimensional" arrays (Was: Re: Should array_length() Return NULL)
От | Dean Rasheed |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [PATCH] Exorcise "zero-dimensional" arrays (Was: Re: Should array_length() Return NULL) |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAEZATCU5Lw+rsJbhTz4T7imLF8uu9Lg2MkN5dtAN9EW_S71H4A@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [PATCH] Exorcise "zero-dimensional" arrays (Was: Re: Should array_length() Return NULL) (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: [PATCH] Exorcise "zero-dimensional" arrays (Was: Re:
Should array_length() Return NULL)
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 28 March 2013 03:01, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > [snip] > ranges *are not arrays*. OK, fair enough. I guess it's the mathematician in me seeing patterns in things that behave similarly, but which are admittedly different. Is the patch also going to allow empty arrays in higher dimensions where not just the last dimension is empty? It seems as though, if it's allowing 1-by-0 arrays like '{{}}' and '[4:4][8:7]={{}}', it should also allow 0-by-0 arrays like '[4:3][8:7]={}', and 0-by-3 arrays like '[4:3][11:13]={}'. That last example seems like the more useful kind of thing to allow, since you might one day be able to append a non-empty 1-D array onto it. As it stands, the patch only allows empty 2-D arrays that are empty in the final dimension, to which the only thing you could append would be more empty 1-D arrays. Regards, Dean
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: