Re: nested hstore patch

On 12/23/2013 12:28 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 6:16 PM, David E. Wheeler <david(at)justatheory(dot)com> wrote:
>> * New operators:
>> + `hstore -> int`: Get string value at array index (starting at 0)
>> + `hstore ^> text`: Get numeric value for key
>> + `hstore ^> int`: Get numeric value at array index
>> + `hstore ?> text`: Get boolean value for key
>> + `hstore ?> int`: Get boolean value at array index
>> + `hstore #> text[]`: Get string value for key path
>> + `hstore #^> text[]`: Get numeric value for key path
>> + `hstore #?> text[]`: Get boolean value for key path
>> + `hstore %> text`: Get hstore value for key
>> + `hstore %> int`: Get hstore value at array index
>> + `hstore #%> text[]`: Get hstore value for key path
>> + `hstore ? int`: Does hstore contain array index
>> + `hstore #? text[]`: Does hstore contain key path
>> + `hstore - int`: Delete index from left operand
>> + `hstore #- text[]`: Delete key path from left operand
> Although in some ways there's a certain elegance to this, it also
> sorta looks like punctuation soup. I can't help wondering whether
> we'd be better off sticking to function names.
>
Has anybody looked into how hard it would be to add "method" notation
to postgreSQL, so that instead of calling

getString(hstorevalue, n)

we could use

hstorevalue.getString(n)

--
Hannu Krosing
PostgreSQL Consultant
Performance, Scalability and High Availability
2ndQuadrant Nordic OÜ