On 3/21/2017 5:48 PM, Jon Zeppieri wrote:
Ah, except apparently `pg-array` only supports arrays with dimension
1. So... that won't help.
I *think* Ryan Culpepper fixed that a long time ago ... though the docs
may never have been updated. I had a workaround at the time and
unfortunately I never did go back to verify the fix in later releases.
George
On 12/18/2014 09:03 PM, George Neuner wrote:
Using 6.0.1. I just painfully discovered that
(pg-array->list (list->pg-array (list)))
=> ERROR
pg-array->list: expected argument of type <pg-array of dimension
1>; given: (pg-array 0 '() '() '#())
The documentation for list->pg-array states that it produces an
array of dimension 1. However, if you pass an empty list, you get
back an array of dimension zero which you then can't transform back to
a list [ except by going straight to the internal vector ].
My question is, "shouldn't these conversions be symmetric?" I
understand an array with no elements is meaningless as an array, but
Postgresql (ab)uses arrays as substitutes for lists and sets, so an
empty array does have meaning.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket
Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
