Merlin Moncure escribió:
> On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 7:22 AM, Andrew Tipton <and...@kiwidrew.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 8:12 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> +1, but I'm wondering why we need anything more than just
> >> json_typeof(). Doesn't that pretty much cover it?
> >
> > I agree with Merlin that json_is_object() is superfluous, since it can just
> > be replaced with json_typeof() = 'object'. Likewise for json_is_array().
> > But without json_is_scalar(), the choice is one of these two forms:
> > json_typeof() NOT IN ('object', 'array')
> > json_typeof() IN ('string', 'number', 'boolean', 'null')
> >
> > And it protects the user against forgetting about, say, the 'null' typeof()
> > when constructing their check expression.
>
> right: I was thinking also that if/when json were ever to get new
> types, you'd appreciate that function.
That was what I thought as well upon seen the code.
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
