| From: | "Shulgin, Oleksandr" <oleksandr(dot)shulgin(at)zalando(dot)de> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Ryan Pedela <rpedela(at)datalanche(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, hlinnaka <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Generalized JSON output functions |
| Date: | 2015-07-29 10:44:15 |
| Message-ID: | CACACo5QKOiZ-00Jf6W2Uf0Pst05qRekQ9UzssyBL0m9FGKdS2Q@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>
> On July 13 I wrote:
>
> Yes, but I think the plugin is the right place to do it. What is more,
>> this won't actually prevent you completely from producing non-ECMAScript
>> compliant JSON, since json or jsonb values containing offending numerics
>> won't be caught, AIUI. But a fairly simple to write function that reparsed
>> and fixed the JSON inside the decoder would work.
>>
>
> The OP admitted that this was a serious flaw in his approach. In fact,
> given that a json value can contain an offending numeric value, any
> approach which doesn't involve reparsing is pretty much bound to fail.
>
I agree that was a critical omission in my thinking.
Now, back to the whitespace issue: I could submit a patch to unify the
whitespace w/o all the hairy callbacks. Did we have the consensus here: no
spaces whatsoever unless some *_pretty function is used?
--
Alex
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Shulgin, Oleksandr | 2015-07-29 10:44:36 | Re: deparsing utility commands |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2015-07-29 10:43:53 | Re: pg_basebackup and replication slots |