Re: Initial review of xslt with no limits patch - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Initial review of xslt with no limits patch
Date
Msg-id 7938.1281119553@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Initial review of xslt with no limits patch  (Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Initial review of xslt with no limits patch  (Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> writes:
> For Tom: proposed syntax can be used generally - everywhere when you
> are working with collection. It can be used for hash (hstore)
> constructor for example. For me is more readable code like

> select hstore(name := 'Tomas', surname := 'Novak')

You've tried to sell us on that before, with few takers.  This proposed
use-case impresses me even less than the previous ones, because callers
of xslt_process seem quite likely to need to work with non-constant
parameter names.

In any case, given what we have at the moment for function overload
resolution rules, I think it's a fundamentally bad idea to introduce
a "wild card" function type that would necessarily conflict with
practically every other possible function declaration.  So regardless
of what use-cases you propose, I'm going to vote against that.
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Gordon Shannon
Date:
Subject: Surprising dead_tuple_count from pgstattuple
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: including backend ID in relpath of temp rels - updated patch