| From: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)justatheory(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Petr Jelinek <pjmodos(at)pjmodos(dot)net> |
| Cc: | "'Robert Haas'" <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "'Merlin Moncure'" <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, "'PostgreSQL-development Hackers'" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: JSON Function Bike Shedding |
| Date: | 2013-02-19 17:44:59 |
| Message-ID: | D16309F4-9D4C-4BF9-ACB7-DCE5CFDA291C@justatheory.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Feb 19, 2013, at 6:11 AM, Petr Jelinek <pjmodos(at)pjmodos(dot)net> wrote:
>> some of the points you raise are valid, but in my (minority) opinion
>> overloading creates more problems than it solves. You're not going to
>> convince me that get() is *ever* a good name for a function - you might as
>> well call it thing() or foo() for all the useful information that name
> conveys.
>
> Let me join the minority here, +1
Well, that's why I called them get_json() and get_text(). Basically, I don't mind that the function name says something about the return type.
Best,
David
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Fabrízio de Royes Mello | 2013-02-19 18:07:40 | Re: Call for Google Summer of Code mentors, admins |
| Previous Message | Tomas Vondra | 2013-02-19 16:58:28 | Re: PATCH: Split stats file per database WAS: autovacuum stress-testing our system |