Re: [PATCH] regexp_positions ( string text, pattern text, flags text ) → setof int4range[]
От | Daniel Gustafsson |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [PATCH] regexp_positions ( string text, pattern text, flags text ) → setof int4range[] |
Дата | |
Msg-id | E4851E05-A9C9-4B5F-B809-8E020DE527F6@yesql.se обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Re: [PATCH] regexp_positions ( string text, pattern text, flags text ) → setof int4range[] (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: [PATCH] regexp_positions ( string text, pattern text, flags text ) → setof int4range[]
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
> On 1 Sep 2021, at 16:02, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > Daniel Gustafsson <daniel@yesql.se> writes: >>> On 9 Mar 2021, at 20:30, Joel Jacobson <joel@compiler.org> wrote: >>> Attached is a patch implementing it this way. > >> This patch no longer applies, can you please submit a rebased version? On a brief skim, this patch includes the doc stanza for regexp_replace which I assume is a copy/pasteo. + TupleDescInitEntry(tupdesc, (AttrNumber) 1, "starts”, While “start_positions” is awfully verbose, just “starts” doesn’t really roll off the tongue. Perhaps “positions” would be more explanatory? > Also, since 642433707 ("This patch adds new functions regexp_count(), > regexp_instr(), regexp_like(), and regexp_substr(), and extends > regexp_replace() with some new optional arguments") is already in, > we need to think about how this interacts with that. Do we even > still need any more functionality in this area? Should we try to > align the APIs? I can see value in a function like this one, and the API is AFAICT fairly aligned with what I as a user would expect it to be given what we already have. -- Daniel Gustafsson https://vmware.com/
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: