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