On 07/15/24 10:46, Chapman Flack wrote: > Ah, I may have mistaken which functions the patch meant to apply to. > ... > Any choice to use similar argument names in the regexp_* functions would > be a matter of consistency with the analogous ISO functions, not anything > mandated.
Or, looking back, I might have realized these were the non-ISO regexp_* functions, but seen there was bikeshedding happening over the best name to use for the occurrence argument, and merely suggested ISO's choice OCCURRENCE for the analogous ISO functions, as a possible bikeshed accelerator. Regards, -Chap
