2010/8/6 David E. Wheeler <da...@kineticode.com>: > On Aug 6, 2010, at 11:13 AM, Tom Lane wrote: > >> That would work too, although I think it might be a bit harder to use >> than one alternating-name-and-value array, at least in some scenarios. >> You'd have to be careful that you got the values in the same order in >> both arrays, which'd be easy to botch. >> >> There might be other use-cases where two separate arrays are easier >> to use, but I'm not seeing one offhand. > > Stuff like this makes me wish PostgreSQL had an ordered pair data type. Then > you'd just have a function with `variadic ordered pair` as the signature. >
yes it is one a possibility and probably best. The nice of this variant can be two forms like current variadic does - foo(.., a := 10, b := 10) or foo(.., variadic ARRAY[(a,10),(b,10)]) > I don't suppose anyone has implemented a data type like this… > > Best, > > David > > -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
