Re: Open 7.3 items

From: Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com>
To: Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)tm(dot)ee>
Cc: Sean Chittenden <sean(at)chittenden(dot)org>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Open 7.3 items
Date: 2002-08-15 06:12:12
Message-ID: 3D5B463C.6050500@joeconway.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hannu Krosing wrote:
> What about functions
>
> 1. split(text,text,int) returns text
>
> 2. split(text,text) returns text[]
>
> and why not
>
> 3. split(text,text,text) returns text
>
> which returns text from $1 delimited by $2 and $3

Given the time remaining before beta, I'll be happy just to get #1 done.

I can see the utility of #2 (or perhaps even a table function which
breaks the string into individual rows). I'm not sure I understand #3.

I am concerned about the name though -- only in that there are usually
objections raised to function names that are too likely to conflict with
user created function names. But "split" is good from the standpoint
that it is used in other languages, so people should find it familiar.

Anyone have comments on the name?

Joe

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Mike Mascari 2002-08-15 07:27:06 Re: Open 7.3 items
Previous Message Tom Lane 2002-08-15 06:03:18 Re: Bug with CREATE CONSRAINT TRIGGER and attisdropped