Tom Lane wrote:
> Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> writes:
>
>> Other, unrelated, options being or not being there doesn't really have
>> any bearing on this though. I'm not inventing new syntax here. I'm
>> just removing a restriction on what the user can do that doesn't need
>> to exist.
>>
>
> I don't think you're "just removing a restriction". What you're doing
> is exposing a whole lot of strange and arguably broken corner cases.
> If we accept this patch I think we'll be fielding bug reports as a
> result for years to come. I *especially* dislike the part about
> allowing the delimiter character in the null string --- that will allow
> people to complain about the order in which decisions are made.
>
>
>
Yeah, if you allow the delimiter in the null string, what do you do if
it's not quoted? I can't imagine what the real world case for that could
possibly be.
Even if there's an arguable case for allowing the quote char in a null
string (and as I indicated upthread I really think the problem being
addressed here could be solved in a far better fashion) there is surely
no good case for allowing the delimiter. Oh, and if we did allow the
quote char we should surely only allow it on input - just because other
programs produce absurd output there is not reason we should.
cheers
andrew
