On 6 November 2015 at 12:45, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 9:57 AM, YUriy Zhuravlev > <u.zhurav...@postgrespro.ru> wrote: >> Hello hackers. >> There are comments to my patch? Maybe I should create a separate thread? >> Thanks. > > You should add this on commitfest.postgresql.org. > > I think the first question that needs to be answered is "do we want > this?". I'm sure I know your answer, but what do other people think?
Omitted bounds are common in other languages and would be handy. I don't think they'd cause any issues with multi-dimensional arrays or variable start-pos arrays. I'd love negative indexes, but the variable-array-start (mis)feature means we can't have those. I wouldn't shed a tear if variable-start-position arrays were deprecated and removed, but that's a multi-year process, and I'm not convinced negative indexes justify it even though the moveable array start pos feature seems little-used. Since the start-pos is recorded in the array, I wonder if it's worth supporting negative indexing for arrays with the default 1-indexed element numbering, and just ERRORing for others. Does anyone really use anything else? -- Craig Ringer 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
