On Fri, Jun 02, 2023 at 11:47:16AM -0400, Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
> * Not completely convinced of the name "zero" (better than
> "stop_when_no_rows_returned"). Considered adding a new x=y argument, or
> overloading c (c=-1) but neither seemed very intuitive. On the other hand,
> it's tempting to stick to a single method moving forward, although this is
> a boolean option not a x=y one like the other two.
Wouldn't something like a target_rows be more flexible? You could use
this parameter with a target number of rows to expect, zero being one
choice in that.
--
Michael
