On 2023-Jul-18, Amit Langote wrote: > Attached updated patches. In 0002, I removed the mention of the > RETURNING clause in the JSON(), JSON_SCALAR() documentation, which I > had forgotten to do in the last version which removed its support in > code.
> I think 0001 looks ready to go. Alvaro? It looks reasonable to me. > Also, I've been wondering if it isn't too late to apply the following > to v16 too, so as to make the code look similar in both branches: Hmm. > 785480c953 Pass constructName to transformJsonValueExpr() I think 785480c953 can easily be considered a bugfix on 7081ac46ace8, so I agree it's better to apply it to 16. > b6e1157e7d Don't include CaseTestExpr in JsonValueExpr.formatted_expr I feel a bit uneasy about this one. It seems to assume that formatted_expr is always set, but at the same time it's not obvious that it is. (Maybe this aspect just needs some more commentary). I agree that it would be better to make both branches identical, because if there's a problem, we are better equipped to get a fix done to both. As for the removal of makeCaseTestExpr(), I agree -- of the six callers of makeNode(CastTestExpr), only two of them would be able to use the new function, so it doesn't look of general enough usefulness. -- Álvaro Herrera Breisgau, Deutschland — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/ Y una voz del caos me habló y me dijo "Sonríe y sé feliz, podría ser peor". Y sonreí. Y fui feliz. Y fue peor.