Re: [PATCH] Exorcise "zero-dimensional" arrays (Was: Re: Should array_length() Return NULL)

From: Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Brendan Jurd <direvus(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Exorcise "zero-dimensional" arrays (Was: Re: Should array_length() Return NULL)
Date: 2013-06-21 00:13:48
Message-ID: CAHyXU0yUi8W5=0cfSohP9ekRNNQNUYOwzEYrfGHE4kJfRu2Xwg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 6:40 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
>> Kinda -- what I'm saying is you just don't go around changing function
>> behaviors to make them 'better' unless the affected behavior was
>> specifically reserved as undefined. The fact is nobody knows how many
>> users will be affected and the extent of the ultimate damage (pro tip:
>> it's always more and worse than expected); I'm astonished it's even
>> being considered.
>
> Well, I think the question is how many people have such arrays that will
> be effected. If we don't do something, we live with this odd behavior
> forever. We have been willing to make some bold decisions in the past
> to improve user experience, and it mostly has worked out well. I
> disagree that it is always worse than expected.

Well, you can have the last word (although 'bold' was an interesting
word choice, heh) -- I feel guilty enough about beating up Brendan
already. I feel this way every time compatibility changes come up, so
it's nothing specific to this patch really.

merlin

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2013-06-21 01:22:52 Re: [PATCH] Exorcise "zero-dimensional" arrays (Was: Re: Should array_length() Return NULL)
Previous Message Andres Freund 2013-06-21 00:09:00 Re: pluggable compression support