Re: Some questions about the array.

On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 4:53 PM, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
wrote:

> 2015-11-09 14:44 GMT+01:00 YUriy Zhuravlev <u(dot)zhuravlev(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>:
>
>> On Monday 09 November 2015 13:50:20 Pavel Stehule wrote:
>> > New symbols increase a complexity of our code and our documentation.
>> >
>> > If some functionality can be implemented via functions without
>> performance
>> > impacts, we should not to create new operators or syntax - mainly for
>> > corner use cases.
>> >
>> > Regards
>> >
>> > Pavel
>>
>> Ok we can use {:} instead [:] for zero array access.
>> The function is the solution half.
>>
>
> It isn't solution. The any syntax/behave change have to have stronger
> motivation. We had so talk about it 20 years ago :(
>

Assuming array[~n] has a current meaning, could we give a try to new syntax
which doesn't have current meaning? Not yet sure what exactly it could be...

------
Alexander Korotkov
Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com
The Russian Postgres Company