Horton

Re: Range Types - typo + NULL string constructor

Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>

View thread
From: Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>
To: Florian Pflug <fgp@phlo.org>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Erik Rijkers <er@xs4all.nl>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Date: 2011-09-22T06:01:22Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

  1. Replace the "New Linear" GiST split algorithm for boxes and points with a

On Thu, 2011-09-22 at 02:31 +0200, Florian Pflug wrote:
> My personal favourite would be '0', since it resembles the symbol used
> for empty sets in mathematics, and we already decided to use mathematical
> notation for ranges.
> 
> If we're concerned that most of our users won't get that, then 'empty'
> would be a viable alternative I think.
> 
> From a consistency POV it'd make sense to use a bracket-based syntax
> also for empty ranges. But the only available options would be '()' and '[]',
> which are too easily confused with '(,)' and '[,]' (which we already
> decided should represent the full range).

Yes, I think () is too close to (,).

Brainstorming so far:
 0       : simple, looks like the empty set symbol
 empty   : simple
 <empty> : a little more obvious that it's special
 <>      : visually looks empty
 -       : also looks empty
 {}      : mathematical notation, but doesn't quite fit ranges

I don't have a strong opinion. I'd be OK with any of those.

Regards,
	Jeff Davis