| From: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Cc: | Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>, Jeremy Drake <jeremyd(at)jdrake(dot)com>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Subject: | Re: patch adding new regexp functions |
| Date: | 2007-02-15 08:22:27 |
| Message-ID: | 200702150922.28871.peter_e@gmx.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
Neil Conway wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-02-14 at 16:49 -0800, Jeremy Drake wrote:
> > What was the status of this? Was there anything else I needed to
> > do with this patch, or is it ready to be applied? Let me know if
> > there is anything else I need to do on this...
>
> Will do -- I'm planning to apply this as soon as I have the free
> cycles to do so, likely tomorrow or Friday.
I don't know which patch is actually being proposed now. It would be
good to make this more explicit and maybe include a synopsis of the
functions in the email, so we know what's going on.
What confuses me about some of the functions I've seen in earlier
patches in this thread is that they return setof something. But in my
mind, regular expression matches or string splits are inherently
ordered, so an array would be the correct return type.
--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeremy Drake | 2007-02-15 08:56:06 | Re: patch adding new regexp functions |
| Previous Message | oliver rombaoa | 2007-02-15 07:54:16 | automatic password for pg_dump to be used for a batch file in vb6 |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeremy Drake | 2007-02-15 08:56:06 | Re: patch adding new regexp functions |
| Previous Message | Neil Conway | 2007-02-15 05:50:08 | Re: patch adding new regexp functions |