Re: jsonb problematic operators

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
--

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  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)