Horton

Re: [PATCH] proposal for regexp_count, regexp_instr, regexp_substr and regexp_replace

Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>
To: Gilles Darold <gilles@darold.net>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Erik Rijkers <er@xs4all.nl>, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org, chap@anastigmatix.net
Date: 2021-12-20T09:43:20Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On 15.12.21 14:15, Gilles Darold wrote:
> Le 15/12/2021 à 13:41, Peter Eisentraut a écrit :
>> On 03.08.21 19:10, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> Gilles Darold <gilles@darold.net> writes:
>>>> Sorry I have missed that, but I'm fine with this implemenation so let's
>>>> keep the v6 version of the patch and drop this one.
>>>
>>> Pushed, then.  There's still lots of time to tweak the behavior of 
>>> course.
>>
>> I have a documentation follow-up to this.  It seems that these new 
>> functions are almost a de facto standard, whereas the SQL-standard 
>> functions are not implemented anywhere.  I propose the attached patch 
>> to update the subsection in the pattern-matching section to give more 
>> detail on this and suggest equivalent functions among these newly 
>> added ones.  What do you think?
> 
> 
> I'm in favor to apply your changes to documentation. It is a good thing 
> to precise the relation between this implementation of the regex_* 
> functions and the SQL stardard.

ok, done

Commits

  1. doc: More documentation on regular expressions and SQL standard

  2. Add assorted new regexp_xxx SQL functions.