Re: json api WIP patch

Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Daniel Farina <daniel@heroku.com>, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2013-02-04T16:10:47Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 02/04/2013 10:47 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>
> The SQL standards considerations seem worth thinking about, too.
> We've certainly gone through a lot of pain working toward eliminating
> => as an operator name, and if the SQL standard has commandeered ->
> for some purpose or other, I'd really rather not add to the headaches
> involved should we ever decide to reclaim it.


OK, but I'd like to know what is going to be safe. There's no way to 
future-proof the language. I'm quite prepared to replace -> with 
something else, and if I do then ->> will need to be adjusted 
accordingly, I think.

My suggestion would be ~> and ~>>. I know David Wheeler didn't like that 
on the ground that some fonts elevate ~ rather than aligning it in the 
middle as most monospaced fonts do, but I'm tempted just to say "then 
use a different font." Other possibilities that come to mind are +> and 
+>>, although I think they're less attractive. But I'll be guided by the 
consensus, assuming there is one ;-)

cheers

andrew