Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com> writes:
> This new version of the patch was posted after the commitfest item was
> marked ready for committer. Does anyone have further comments or
> objections to the concept or syntax before I try to take this forward?
The quoted excerpt fails to say what solution was adopted to the array
syntax issues, so it's impossible to have an opinion without actually
reading the patch.
However ... one thing I was intending to mention on this thread is that
"get the array type over this type" isn't the only extension one might
wish for. Another likely desire is "get the type of field 'foo' of this
composite type". I don't suggest that this patch needs to implement
that right now; but it would be a good thing if we could see how the
chosen syntax could be extended in such a direction. Otherwise we might
be painting ourselves into a corner.
regards, tom lane
