Re: So what's an "empty" array anyway?

From: "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: So what's an "empty" array anyway?
Date: 2008-10-21 21:21:41
Message-ID: 4A92F109-CE17-4F16-A46A-0B48D01DB828@kineticode.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Oct 21, 2008, at 14:16, Tom Lane wrote:

> Well, we can't do that because it would clearly break too much
> existing
> code. '{}' has got to result in something you can successfully
> concatenate more elements to.

Right, that's what I was trying to day. Badly, I guess.

> But either the current behavior with
> a zero-dimension array, or a one-dimensional length-zero array would
> presumably work okay.

Right, that sounds right to me.

Thanks,

David

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Josh Berkus 2008-10-21 21:23:49 Re: So what's an "empty" array anyway?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2008-10-21 21:16:29 Re: So what's an "empty" array anyway?