From: | Nico Williams <nico(at)cryptonector(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Geoff Winkless <gwinkless(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: jsonb problematic operators |
Date: | 2016-12-13 17:13:50 |
Message-ID: | 20161213171348.GA1880@localhost |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 10:26:24AM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 10:22 PM, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu> wrote:
> > One option might be for Postgres to define duplicate operator names
> > using ¿ or something else. I think ¿ is a good choice because it's a
> > common punctuation mark in spanish so it's probably not hard to find
> > on a lot of keyboards or hard to find instructions on how to type one.
>
> Are you sure that using a non-ASCII character is a good idea for an
> in-core operator? I would think no.
Eventually language designers will cross that Rubicon in mainstream
languages. And why not? It sure would be convenient... from the
designer's p.o.v. Of course, _users_ would be annoyed, as most users
in the English-speaking world will have no idea how to type such
characters, most others also will not know how to, and there will be
users still using non-Unicode locales who will be unable to type such
characters at all. Cut-n-paste will save the day, not doubt, though
mostly/only for users using Unicode locales.
But it is tempting.
Using non-ASCII Unicode characters for _alternatives_ seems like a
possible starting point though, since that leaves users with a
universally- available ASCII alternative. Still, now users would then
have to recognize multiple equivalent forms... ugh.
Nico
--
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ildar Musin | 2016-12-13 17:22:12 | Re: Declarative partitioning - another take |
Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2016-12-13 17:09:16 | Re: exposing wait events for non-backends (was: Tracking wait event for latches) |