On 22.04.22 16:18, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com> writes:
>> On 20.04.22 18:53, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Yeah, that's another way to do it. I think though that the unresolved
>>> question is whether or not we want the field name to appear in the output
>>> when the field is null. I believe that I intentionally made it not appear
>>> originally, so that that case could readily be distinguished. You could
>>> argue that that would complicate life greatly for a _readPathTarget()
>>> function, which is true, but I don't foresee that we'll need one.
>
>> We could adapt the convention to print NULL values as "<>", like
>
> Works for me.
done
