On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 9:39 AM, Pavel Stehule <pavel.steh...@gmail.com> wrote: > It was discussed before. I would to see some symmetry in names.
That's reasonable. > The > bad thing is so great names like string_to_array and array_to_string > is used, Yeah, those names are not too good. > and second bad thing was done three years ago when nobody > thinking about NULL values. I don't think, so we are able to repair > older functions - simply the default behave isn't optimal. This is a matter of opinion, but certainly it's not right for everyone. > I am thinking so we have to do decision about string_to_array and > array_to_string deprecation first. If these function will be > deprecated, then we can use a similar names (and probably we should to > use a similar names) - so text_to_array or array_to_string can be > acceptable. If not, then this discus is needless - then to_string and > to_array have to be maximally in contrib - stringfunc is good idea - > and maybe we don't need thinking about new names. Well, -1 from me for deprecating string_to_array and array_to_string. I am not in favor of the names to_string and to_array even if we put them in contrib, though. The problem with string_to_array and array_to_string is that they aren't descriptive enough, and to_string/to_array is even less so. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
