Re: patch: to_string, to_array functions

Hello

here is a new version - new these functions are not a strict and
function to_string is marked as stable.

both functions share code with older version.

Regards

Pavel

2010/7/16 Brendan Jurd <direvus(at)gmail(dot)com>:
> On 17 July 2010 04:52, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> 2010/7/16 Brendan Jurd <direvus(at)gmail(dot)com>:
>>> Also, if we're going to make the function non-strict, we need to
>>> consider how to respond when the user specifies NULL for the other
>>> arguments.  If the field separator is NULL, bearing in mind that NULL
>>> can't match any string, I would expect that to_array would return the
>>> undivided string as a single array element, and that to_string would
>>> throw an error:
>>>
>>
>> ok, it has a sense.
>>
>> other question is empty string as separator - but I think, it can has
>> same behave like string_to_array and array_to_string functions.
>>
>
> Agreed.  Those behaviours seem sensible.
>
>>> If the first argument is NULL for either function, I think it would be
>>> reasonable to return NULL.  But I could be convinced that we should
>>> throw an error in that case too.
>>>
>>
>> I agree - I prefer a NULL
>>
>> Thank You very much
>
> No worries; I will await a revised patch from you which updates these
> behaviours -- please incorporate the doc/comment changes I posted
> earlier -- I will then do a further review before handing off to a
> committer.
>
> Cheers,
> BJ
>