Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: xpath not a good replacement for xpath_string

From: "Kevin Grittner" <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>
To: "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: <pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com>,"PostgreSQL" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: xpath not a good replacement for xpath_string
Date: 2009-07-28 20:29:16
Message-ID: 4A6F194C0200002500028E85@gw.wicourts.gov (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> wrote:
 
> in fact the desired functionality is present [...] You just need to
> use the text() function to get the contents of the node, and an
> array subscript to pull it out of the result array.
 
I just took a quick look, and that didn't jump out at me from the
documentation.  Perhaps there should be an example or two of how to
get the equivalent functionality through the newer standard API, for
those looking to migrate?
 
Would it make sense to supply convenience SQL functions which map
some of the old API to the new?
 
-Kevin

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: pgsqlDate: 2009-07-28 20:30:23
Subject: Re: xpath not a good replacement for xpath_string
Previous:From: Andrew DunstanDate: 2009-07-28 20:19:58
Subject: Re: xpath not a good replacement for xpath_string

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group