Re: factorial function/phase out postfix operators? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: factorial function/phase out postfix operators?
Date
Msg-id 517075.1600457478@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: factorial function/phase out postfix operators?  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: factorial function/phase out postfix operators?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 2:11 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> What I now propose is to add two output columns:
>> 
>> barelabel bool  (t or f, obviously)
>> baredesc text   ("can be bare label" or "requires AS", possibly localized)

> That might be over-engineered in a vacuum, but it seems like it may be
> cleaner to stick with the existing precedent than to diverge from it.

Yeah, my recollection of the pg_get_keywords design is that we couldn't
agree on whether to emit a machine-friendly description or a
human-friendly one, so we compromised by doing both :-(.  But the same
factors exist with this addition --- you can make an argument for
preferring either boolean or text output.

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: factorial function/phase out postfix operators?
Next
From: Mark Dilger
Date:
Subject: Re: speed up unicode normalization quick check