Re: How hard would it be to support LIKE in return declaration of generic record function calls ?

On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 9:01 AM, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> wrote:
> On 05/03/2012 09:43 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>>
>> 2012/5/3 Merlin Moncure<mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>:
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 3, 2012 at 7:13 AM, Pavel Stehule<pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
>>>  wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hello
>>>>
>>>>> (1 row)
>>>>>
>>>>> This works the same indeed, just seems to be a hack, though a cool
>>>>> one :)
>>>
>>> Yeah -- the syntax isn't great, but IMO it's more generally usable
>>> than what you're proposing because it's a scalar returning function
>>> not a table expression.  Another point is that the proposed 'like'
>>> syntax (which I still think is great, just maybe not for conversions
>>> from json) seems wedded to record types.  The hstore trick should be
>>> able to take a foo[], set it all up and return it.  How would that
>>> work with like?
>>>
>>>> few years back I proposed "anytypename" type
>>>>
>>>> with this feature, you can has some clean and more readable call
>>>>
>>>> SELECT * FROM populate_record(test, ...)
>>>
>>> that would be great IMO.
>>
>> I'll try propose it again - implementation should not be hard
>>
>>
>
> You guys seem to be taking the original proposal off into the weeds. I have
> often wanted to be able to use LIKE in type expressions, and I'd like to see
> exactly that implemented.

would it work for array types? can it called without using FROM?

merlin