Re: Initial review of xslt with no limits patch

2010/8/7 David E. Wheeler <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>:
> On Aug 6, 2010, at 8:49 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>
>>> Sorry, not following you here
>>
>> I would to difference a key and value in notation.
>
> That's exactly what my solution does. The array solution doesn't. Whether it's appropriate to use a custom composite type, however, is an open question.

no it doesn't - in your design there are no different notation for key
and for value. Next this design block a '->'. Because it's based on
polymorphic operator. But it can be a one variant - where you would to
put together expr with expr. And you can't do more from user space
now. But if you have a build in operator for (sqlidentifier, any) with
early processing - like "AS" in xml_attributies, we can do it. The
using of this operator can be limited only on function parameter
context.

>
>>> Pavel doesn't understand "no" ;-)
>>
>> you are don't writing a stored procedures like me - so maybe you are
>> doesn't understand a my motivation. :). I have to try it. You are
>> rejected almost of all my proposals - named parameters, variadic
>> functions, enhancing of RAISE STATEMENT - and now its in core. But it
>> was a battle :).
>
> This is how most stuff gets in: you fight Tom to exhaustion. It's a slog, but usually the resulting implementation is better than it would otherwise have been.
>
>> Try to write a XML-RPC support for PostgreSQL, and
>> try to thinking on programmer comfort, please. I am sure so our
>> support for stored procedures or external procedures are not complete
>> - it is limited by BISON possibilities, and because BISON isn't
>> extensible parser, I am searching other ways. If I can enhance a
>> syntax from external module, I don't talk.
>
> I think that some sort of variadic pairs would be useful for this. But since there is no core "ordered pair" data type, I don't think you're going to get too far.

Postgres has a array of rows (Inside C or plperlu can be transofmed to
real hash simply). It just miss a user friendly notation for using it.

Regards

Pavel
>
> Best,
>
> David
>
>