On 06/08/10 05:38, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On tis, 2010-07-27 at 16:33 -0700, David Fetter wrote:
>
>> * Do we already have it?
>>
>> Not really. There are kludges to accomplish these things, but
>> they're available mostly in the sense that a general-purpose
>> language allows you to write code to do anything a Turing machine
>> can do.
>>
> I think this has been obsoleted by the xmlexists patch
In many ways yes. The only surviving difference is that xpath_exists has
support for namespaces and xmlexists does not as the grammar expects
namespaces to be handled in the xquery. So if people expect namespace
support to be useful that having both functions is useful until I (or
someone who works faster than me) get xquery going.
If the patch is to be committed, does it make sense for me to refine it
such that it uses the new xpath internal function you extracted in the
xmlexists patch?
Regards,
--
Mike Fowler
Registered Linux user: 379787
