On Feb 15, 2013, at 9:25 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> I realize I'm in the minority here, but -1 from me on all of this.
> Should we also rename xml_is_well_formed() to just is_well_formed()?
That would be nice, but I think that ship done sunk.
> string_agg() to agg()?
Would love a different name, but IIRC that followed array_agg(), which was dictated by the SQL standard, in its
infinitewisdom. See also =>.
> Eventually we will have more data types, and
> some of them will have functions that could also be called rows() or
> get_values(), but it's unlikely that they'll have exactly the same
> behavior, which will start to make things confusing.
Well, they will have to take account of *this* precedent and act accordingly. Much easier for them to look back at what
hasbeen done here than for us to look forward to something that today exists as no more than a twinkle in your eye.
Best,
David
