On Jun 19, 2011, at 4:56 PM, Florian Pflug wrote:
Hm, it seems we either all have different idea about how such
a pattern type would be be defined, or have grown so accustomed to
pg's type system that we've forgotten how powerful it really
is ;-) (For me, the latter is surely true...).
On Jun20, 2011, at 18:28 , David E. Wheeler wrote:
I don't suppose there's a special quoting to be had for patterns? Perhaps one
of these (modulo SQL parsing issues);
/pattern/
{pattern}
qr/pattern/
qr'pattern'
R/pattern/
R'pattern'
Pretty daring suggestion, I must
Hi
It looks like we've failed to reach an agreement on how to
proceed on the issue with missing commutators for the various
text matching operators (~, ~~, and their case-insensitive
variants). We do seem to have agreed, however, that adding
commutators for the non-deprecated operators which lack
On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 9:53 AM, Florian Pflug f...@phlo.org wrote:
Amidst the discussion, Alvaro suggested that we resolve the issue
by adding a distinct type for patterns as opposed to text. That'd
allow us to make ~ it's own commutator by defining both
text ~ pattern
and
pattern ~ text.
On Jun19, 2011, at 20:56 , Robert Haas wrote:
On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 9:53 AM, Florian Pflug f...@phlo.org wrote:
Amidst the discussion, Alvaro suggested that we resolve the issue
by adding a distinct type for patterns as opposed to text. That'd
allow us to make ~ it's own commutator by
On 06/19/2011 02:56 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 9:53 AM, Florian Pflugf...@phlo.org wrote:
Amidst the discussion, Alvaro suggested that we resolve the issue
by adding a distinct type for patterns as opposed to text. That'd
allow us to make ~ it's own commutator by defining
Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net writes:
On 06/19/2011 02:56 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 9:53 AM, Florian Pflugf...@phlo.org wrote:
Amidst the discussion, Alvaro suggested that we resolve the issue
by adding a distinct type for patterns as opposed to text. That'd
allow
On Jun19, 2011, at 22:10 , Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net writes:
On 06/19/2011 02:56 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 9:53 AM, Florian Pflugf...@phlo.org wrote:
Amidst the discussion, Alvaro suggested that we resolve the issue
by adding a distinct type for
On 06/19/2011 05:02 PM, Florian Pflug wrote:
On Jun19, 2011, at 22:10 , Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Dunstanand...@dunslane.net writes:
On 06/19/2011 02:56 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 9:53 AM, Florian Pflugf...@phlo.org wrote:
Amidst the discussion, Alvaro suggested that we
On Jun20, 2011, at 00:56 , Andrew Dunstan wrote:
On 06/19/2011 05:02 PM, Florian Pflug wrote:
The only argument against that I can see is that it poses
a compatibility problem if ~ remains the pattern matching
operator. I do believe, however, that the chance of
unknown ~ unknown
appearing
10 matches
Mail list logo
