On 08/18/2015 01:32 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> Hi
>
> 2015-08-17 21:12 GMT+02:00 Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@bluetreble.com
> <mailto:Jim.Nasby@bluetreble.com>>:
>
> On 8/17/15 12:57 PM, Dmitry Dolgov wrote:
>
> * is it interesting for the community?
>
>
> We definitely need better ways to manipulate JSON.
>
> * is that a good idea to extend the `ArrayRef` for jsonb? If it's
> appropriate, probably we can rename it to `ArrayJsonbRef` of
> something.
> * what can be improved in the code at the top level (function
> placement,
> probably, functionality duplication, etc.)?
> * are there any special cases, that I should take care of in this
> implementation?
>
>
> How would this work when you have a JSON array? Postgres array
> syntax suddenly becoming key/value syntax for JSON seems like a
> pretty bad idea to me. Could a different syntax (maybe {}) be used
> instead?
>
>
> I don't understand why '{}' should be better than '[]' ?
>
> The lot of modern languages doesn't different between arrays and hash.
>
>
What is more, it would be a lot more intrusive to the parser, I suspect.
We currently allow json path expressions to contain both object key and
array index values, and I don't see any reason to do this differently.
This is the syntax that was discussed at pgcon.
cheers
andrew
