Am Freitag, 16. Februar 2007 08:02 schrieb Jeremy Drake: > On Thu, 15 Feb 2007, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > I have no strong opinion about how matches are returned. Seeing the > > definitional difficulties that you point out, it may be fine to return > > them unordered. But then all "matches" functions should do that. > > > > For the "split" functions, however, providing the order is clearly > > important. > > Does this version sufficiently address your concerns?
I don't think anyone asked for the start position and length in the result of regexp_split(). The result should be an array of text. That is what Perl et al. do. As for the regexp_matches() function, it seems to me that it returns too much information at once. What is the use case for getting all of prematch, fullmatch, matches, and postmatch in one call? -- Peter Eisentraut http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/ ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
