Re: patch: to_string, to_array functions

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>>>> so my preferences:
>>>>
>>>> 1. split, join - I checked - we are able to create "join" function
>>>> 2. split, array_join - when only "join" can be a problem
>>>> 3. string_split, array_join - there are not clean symmetry, but it
>>>> respect wide used a semantics - string.split, array.join
>>>> 4. explode, implode
>>>> 5. array_explode, array_implode
>>>> -- I cannot to like array_split - it is contradiction for me.
>
> Yeah, I'd like some more votes, too.

I still don't see a compelling reason not to extend existing functions
with a third argument. Or are we talking about deprecating them in the
future (like remove their mention in the docs) and have the new names to
replace them, with the new behavior as the default and the extended call
convention as the old behavior?

I'm not sure about that, so I think extending existing function is ok.

Or we would have to have the new functions work well with other types
too, so that it's compelling to move from the old ones.

Regards,
--
dim