Hello
2013/12/23 Hannu Krosing <ha...@2ndquadrant.com> > On 12/23/2013 12:28 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 6:16 PM, David E. Wheeler <da...@justatheory.com> > wrote: > >> * New operators: > >> + `hstore -> int`: Get string value at array index (starting at 0) > >> + `hstore ^> text`: Get numeric value for key > >> + `hstore ^> int`: Get numeric value at array index > >> + `hstore ?> text`: Get boolean value for key > >> + `hstore ?> int`: Get boolean value at array index > >> + `hstore #> text[]`: Get string value for key path > >> + `hstore #^> text[]`: Get numeric value for key path > >> + `hstore #?> text[]`: Get boolean value for key path > >> + `hstore %> text`: Get hstore value for key > >> + `hstore %> int`: Get hstore value at array index > >> + `hstore #%> text[]`: Get hstore value for key path > >> + `hstore ? int`: Does hstore contain array index > >> + `hstore #? text[]`: Does hstore contain key path > >> + `hstore - int`: Delete index from left operand > >> + `hstore #- text[]`: Delete key path from left operand > > Although in some ways there's a certain elegance to this, it also > > sorta looks like punctuation soup. I can't help wondering whether > > we'd be better off sticking to function names. > > > Has anybody looked into how hard it would be to add "method" notation > to postgreSQL, so that instead of calling > > getString(hstorevalue, n) > > we could use > > hstorevalue.getString(n) > yes, I played with it some years ago. I ended early, there was a problem with parser - when I tried append a new rule. And because there was not simple solution, I didn't continue. But it can be nice feature - minimally for plpgsql coders. Regards Pavel > > -- > Hannu Krosing > PostgreSQL Consultant > Performance, Scalability and High Availability > 2ndQuadrant Nordic OÜ > > > > -- > Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers >
