On 2023-11-01 We 03:00, Jeevan Chalke wrote:
Hello,
On Tue, Oct 24, 2023 at 6:41 PM Andrew Dunstan <and...@dunslane.net>
wrote:
On 2023-10-19 Th 02:06, Jeevan Chalke wrote:
Thanks, Peter for the comments.
On Fri, Oct 6, 2023 at 5:13 PM Peter Eisentraut
<pe...@eisentraut.org> wrote:
On 29.08.23 09:05, Jeevan Chalke wrote:
> v1-0001-Implement-jsonpath-.bigint-.integer-and-.number-m.patch
>
> This commit implements jsonpath .bigint(), .integer(), and
.number()
> methods. The JSON string or a numeric value is converted
to the
> bigint, int4, and numeric type representation.
A comment that applies to all of these: These add various
keywords,
switch cases, documentation entries in some order. Are we
happy with
that? Should we try to reorder all of that for better
maintainability
or readability?
Yeah, that's the better suggestion. While implementing these
methods, I was confused about where to put them exactly and tried
keeping them in some logical place.
I think once these methods get in, we can have a follow-up patch
reorganizing all of these.
I think it would be better to organize things how we want them
before adding in more stuff.
I have tried reordering all the jsonpath Operators and Methods
consistently. With this patch, they all appear in the same order when
together in the group.
In some switch cases, they are still divided, like in
flattenJsonPathParseItem(), where 2-arg, 1-arg, and no-arg cases are
clubbed together. But I have tried to keep them in order in those
subgroups.
I will rebase my patches for this task on this patch, but before doing
so, I would like to get your views on this reordering.
This appears to be reasonable. Maybe we need to add a note in one or two
places about maintaining the consistency?
cheers
andrew
--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB:https://www.enterprisedb.com
