On 02/11/2013 03:21 AM, Yeb Havinga wrote:
>
>>
>> I'm actually wondering if we should use different operator names for
>> the get_path*op functions so we wouldn't need to type qualify the
>> path argument. Maybe ?> and ?>> although I'm reluctant to use ? in an
>> operator given the recent JDBC discussion. Or perhaps #> and #>>.
>
> different operator name: +1.
>
OK, updated patch attached. I went with #> and #>>.
cheers
andrew
