Re: proposal: fix corner use case of variadic fuctions usage
От | Pavel Stehule |
---|---|
Тема | Re: proposal: fix corner use case of variadic fuctions usage |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAFj8pRDBnJgFPaRT_42cQSfXpS2QDbrN5ZK2yX52qknDC2yqzQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: proposal: fix corner use case of variadic fuctions usage (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: proposal: fix corner use case of variadic fuctions usage
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
2013/1/23 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>: > Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> writes: >> what should be result of concat(variadic NULL::int[]) >> I enabled this use case, but what should be result? > > I think there are two somewhat defensible theories: > > (1) punt, and return NULL overall. So in this case the variadic > function would act as if it were STRICT. That seems a bit weird though > if the function is not strict otherwise. > > (2) Treat the NULL as if it were a zero-length array, giving rise to > zero ordinary parameters. This could be problematic if the function > can't cope very well with zero parameters ... but on the other hand, > if it can't do so, then what will it do with VARIADIC '{}'::int[] ? This is repeated question - how much is NULL ~ '{}' There is only one precedent, I think postgres=# select '>>>' || array_to_string('{}'::int[], '') || '<<<';?column? ---------->>><<< (1 row) postgres=# select '>>>' || array_to_string(NULL::int[], '') || '<<<';?column? ---------- (1 row) but this function is STRICT - so there is no precedent :( > > I lean a little bit towards (2) but it's definitely a judgment call. > Anybody have any other arguments one way or the other? > > regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: