Re: Shouldn't jsonpath .string() Unwrap? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From David E. Wheeler
Subject Re: Shouldn't jsonpath .string() Unwrap?
Date
Msg-id 12E14B60-2C7C-4CB2-9ECE-449F6D866D50@justatheory.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Shouldn't jsonpath .string() Unwrap?  (Chapman Flack <jcflack@acm.org>)
Responses Re: Shouldn't jsonpath .string() Unwrap?
List pgsql-hackers

> On Jun 14, 2024, at 11:25, Chapman Flack <jcflack@acm.org> wrote:
>
> I would s/extepsions/exceptions/ in the added documentation. :)

Bah, fixed and attached, thanks.

> Offhand (as GitHub PRs aren't really The PG Way), if they were The Way,
> I would find this one a little hard to follow, being based at a point
> 28 unrelated commits ahead of the ref it's opened against. I suspect
> 'master' on theory/postgres could be fast-forwarded to f1affb6 and then
> the PR would look much more approachable.

Yeah, I pushed the PR and branch before I synced master, and GitHub was taking a while to notice and update the PR. I
fixedit with `git commit --all --amend --date now --reedit-message HEAD` and force-pushed (then fixed the typo and
fixedagain). 

D




Attachment

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: libpq contention due to gss even when not using gss
Next
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: RFC: adding pytest as a supported test framework