Robert Haas rh...@postgresql.org writes:
Add notion of a transform function that can simplify function calls.
Why exactly was this thought to be a good idea:
* A NULL original expression disables use of transform functions while
* retaining all other behaviors.
AFAICT that buys nothing
Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com writes:
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 10:55 AM, Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Why exactly was this thought to be a good idea:
* A NULL original expression disables use of transform functions while
* retaining all other behaviors.
I assumed that we were
Noah Misch n...@leadboat.com writes:
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 10:55:52AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
Why exactly was this thought to be a good idea:
* A NULL original expression disables use of transform functions while
* retaining all other behaviors.
I did it that way because it looked wrong
I wrote:
However, see my response to Robert: why are we passing the original node
to the transform function at all? It would be more useful and easier to
work with to pass the function's fully-processed argument list, I believe.
After a bit of looking around, I realize that the current
Noah Misch n...@leadboat.com writes:
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 11:31:54AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
... I've not looked
yet at the existing transform functions, but why would they want to know
about the original node at all?
You suggested[1] passing an Expr instead of an argument list, and your
