Re: Review: Re: [PATCH] Re: [HACKERS] Adding xpath_exists function

On 06/08/10 05:38, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On tis, 2010-07-27 at 16:33 -0700, David Fetter wrote:
>    
>> * Do we already have it?
>>
>>      Not really.  There are kludges to accomplish these things, but
>>      they're available mostly in the sense that a general-purpose
>>      language allows you to write code to do anything a Turing machine
>>      can do.
>>      
> I think this has been obsoleted by the xmlexists patch

In many ways yes. The only surviving difference is that xpath_exists has 
support for namespaces and xmlexists does not as the grammar expects 
namespaces to be handled in the xquery. So if people expect namespace 
support to be useful that having both functions is useful until I (or 
someone who works faster than me) get xquery going.

If the patch is to be committed, does it make sense for me to refine it 
such that it uses the new xpath internal function you extracted in the 
xmlexists patch?

Regards,

-- 
Mike Fowler
Registered Linux user: 379787