OK, what is the TODO item text?
---
Joe Conway wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Is this a TODO item?
> >
>
> Probably. I posted some questions regarding whether or not to break
> backward compatiblity, and received no re
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Is this a TODO item?
Probably. I posted some questions regarding whether or not to break
backward compatiblity, and received no replies. In the meanwhile, I've
been doing a major system integration in Korea for the last 2 weeks, and
won't get back to home, or to anythin
Is this a TODO item?
---
Markus Bertheau ? wrote:
> ? ???, 06/06/2005 ? 08:58 -0700, Joe Conway ?:
> > Joe Conway wrote:
> > > Actually, consistent with my last post, I think array_upper() on a
> > > zero-element array
Markus Bertheau ☭ wrote:
Hmm, this gets really complicated and inconsistent. Complicated means
unusable. What about modifying the dimension syntax such that the second
number means number of elements instead of upper bound? That particular
problem would go away then, and array_upper('[0:0]={}'::i
В Пнд, 06/06/2005 в 08:58 -0700, Joe Conway пишет:
> Joe Conway wrote:
> > Actually, consistent with my last post, I think array_upper() on a
> > zero-element array should return NULL. A zero-element array has a
> > defined lower bound, but its upper bound is not zero -- it is really
> > undefin
Joe Conway wrote:
Actually, consistent with my last post, I think array_upper() on a
zero-element array should return NULL. A zero-element array has a
defined lower bound, but its upper bound is not zero -- it is really
undefined.
Just to clarify my response, this is what I propose:
regressi
Markus Bertheau ☭ wrote:
В Пнд, 06/06/2005 в 10:44 -0400, Tom Lane пишет:
Markus Bertheau =?UTF-8?Q?=E2=98=AD?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
By analogy, array_upper('{}'::TEXT[], 1) should return 0 instead of
NULL.
No, that doesn't follow ... we've traditionally considered '{}' to
denote a ze
Tom Lane wrote:
Markus Bertheau =?UTF-8?Q?=E2=98=AD?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
By analogy, array_upper('{}'::TEXT[], 1) should return 0 instead of
NULL.
No, that doesn't follow ... we've traditionally considered '{}' to
denote a zero-dimensional array. A 1-D array of no elements is
'[1:0]
В Пнд, 06/06/2005 в 10:44 -0400, Tom Lane пишет:
> Markus Bertheau =?UTF-8?Q?=E2=98=AD?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > By analogy, array_upper('{}'::TEXT[], 1) should return 0 instead of
> > NULL.
>
> No, that doesn't follow ... we've traditionally considered '{}' to
> denote a zero-dimensional
Markus Bertheau =?UTF-8?Q?=E2=98=AD?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> By analogy, array_upper('{}'::TEXT[], 1) should return 0 instead of
> NULL.
No, that doesn't follow ... we've traditionally considered '{}' to
denote a zero-dimensional array. A 1-D array of no elements is
'[1:0]={}', just as Joe
В Втр, 24/05/2005 в 00:06 -0400, Tom Lane пишет:
> Joe Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Markus Bertheau wrote:
> >> why does SELECT ARRAY(SELECT 1 WHERE FALSE) return NULL instead of
> >> ARRAY[] resp. '{}'?
>
> > Why would you expect an empty array instead of a NULL?
>
> I think he's got a
Dnia 24-05-2005, wto o godzinie 00:06 -0400, Tom Lane napisał(a):
> Joe Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Markus Bertheau wrote:
> >> why does SELECT ARRAY(SELECT 1 WHERE FALSE) return NULL instead of
> >> ARRAY[] resp. '{}'?
>
> > Why would you expect an empty array instead of a NULL?
>
> I
12 matches
Mail list logo
