On Tuesday 07 June 2005 10:57, David Fetter wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 10:27:28PM +0900, Atsushi Ogawa wrote:
> > My idea is opposite. I think that the regexp_replace() should make
> > "replace all" a default. Because the replace() of pgsql replaces all
> > string, and regexp_replace() of oracle10g is also similar.
>
> I respectfully disagree. Although Oracle does things this way, no
> other regular expression search and replace does. Historically, you
> can find that "Oracle does it this way" is not a reason why we would
> do it. Text editors, programming languages, etc., etc. do "replace
> the first" by default and "replace globally" only when told to.
>
You don't think it will be confusing to have a function called replace which
replaces all occurrences and a function called regex_replace which only
replaces the first occurance? There's something to be said for consitancy
within pgsql itself.
--
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your
joining column's datatypes do not match
