On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 6:51 PM, Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rash...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 6 January 2016 at 20:09, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 10:21 AM, Dean Rasheed <dean.a.rash...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> It seems like a useful function to have, but perhaps it should just be >>> called trim() rather than numeric_trim(), for consistency with the >>> names of the other numeric functions, which don't start with >>> "numeric_". >> >> That wouldn't work in this case, because we have hard-coded parser >> productions for TRIM(). >> > > Ah. Good point. > > Pity -- I would have liked a nice short name for this, in a similar > vein to the existing numeric functions.
My experiences with function overloading haven't been enormously positive - things that we think will work out sometimes don't, a la the whole pg_size_pretty mess. In this case, trim(stringy-thingy) and trim(numberish-thingy) aren't even really doing the same thing, which makes me even less excited about it. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers