"Brendan Jurd" <dire...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 11:07 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> ISTM one could make a pretty good argument that this last case should
>> succeed, producing an empty-array argument. If you buy that, then it
>> is sensible to forbid defaults for variadics,
> Yep, +1 for this approach. I would intuitively expect that, if I omit
> variadic argument(s) when calling a function, that the function ends
> up getting an empty array of the appropriate type.
Actually, I just realized that there's another fly in the ointment:
the current variadic code allows "variadic anyarray", which is
equivalent to an appropriate number of anyelement arguments. If we
allow defaulting then there's a big problem: no principled way to
decide what type the empty array is.
The explicit-default solution would work around that, by making the
user say what type he wants. However it puts us right back into the
situation of having a default for a polymorphic argument, which I
was hoping to avoid.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
