On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 2:20 AM, Alexander Korotkov <aekorot...@gmail.com>wrote:
> 4. If we do go with a new function, I'd like to just call it "consistent" >> (or consistent2 or something, to keep it separate form the old consistent >> function), and pass it a tri-state input for each search term. It might not >> be any different for the full-text search implementation, or any of the >> other ones for that matter, but I think it would be a more understandable >> API. > > > Understandable API makes sense. But for now, I can't see even potentional > usage of third state (exact false). > Typo here. I meant "exact true". > Also, with preConsistent interface "as is" in some cases we can use old > consistent method as both consistent and preConsistent when it implements > monotonous boolean function. For example, it's consistent function for > opclasses of arrays. > Now, I got the point of three state consistent: we can keep only one consistent in opclasses that support new interface. exact true and exact false values will be passed in the case of current patch consistent; exact false and unknown will be passed in the case of current patch preConsistent. That's reasonable. ------ With best regards, Alexander Korotkov.
