Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3826.600.51.1.1\))
Subject: Re: PATCH: jsonpath string methods: lower, upper, initcap, l/r/btrim,
 replace, split_part
From: Florents Tselai <florents.tselai@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <C54B0664-34F5-46E2-9094-5798E68A2A3F@justatheory.com>
Date: Sun, 25 May 2025 07:16:57 +0300
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>,
 Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>,
 Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>,
 Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com>,
 pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>,
 Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <696ECBBC-3CBF-4522-AE66-E48225688E93@gmail.com>
References: 
 <CA+v5N40sJF39m0v7h=QN86zGp0CUf9F1WKasnZy9nNVj_VhCZQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <145894.1727298237@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CAPpHfdtGhn_5jfLoepOScyqT+FXYB9QtV-OEprychDcMJco7mw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+v5N42PVJH3HbwLE1yC75XR6E5zGnCCdtSUXfgFwtGyPP8XYg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+Tgmob03B6h1SMsi7vs9uOX+vrqg_tyhh--mKC3BaTJ08qKYA@mail.gmail.com>
 <7e9debe6-4e96-4b0d-a801-b531e962ef43@eisentraut.org>
 <01DC1C38-0692-461B-AA63-5394330356BE@gmail.com>
 <2568904.1748022721@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <D57D3B5E-AF55-4F7F-9E55-FE06EE8ED811@justatheory.com>
 <40912112-7FFE-400F-A38F-368827C4BDF1@gmail.com>
 <D201EEF7-8681-458E-B287-7B8F058DC712@justatheory.com>
 <176C517D-2DEB-4CAB-9AE4-261079D313B9@justatheory.com>
 <8FD5F4CF-9059-40C1-9F0A-C3CBA8DFE17A@justatheory.com>
 <C54B0664-34F5-46E2-9094-5798E68A2A3F@justatheory.com>
To: "David E. Wheeler" <david@justatheory.com>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/696ECBBC-3CBF-4522-AE66-E48225688E93%40gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk


> On 25 May 2025, at 1:01=E2=80=AFAM, David E. Wheeler =
<david@justatheory.com> wrote:
>=20
> On May 24, 2025, at 17:55, David E. Wheeler <david@justatheory.com> =
wrote:
>=20
>> And now I see my patch broke the grammar because I left some of my =
fiddling in there. Apologies. Here=E2=80=99s an updated patch with the =
updated keyword map, too.
>=20
> No, really :sigh:
>=20
> D
>=20
> <v5-0001-Add-additional-jsonpath-string-methods.patch>

The most important problem in jsonpath_scan.l now is the fact that I =
broke the alphabetical ordering of keywords in v2 ,
and you followed that too.


> I'm curious why you added the `arg0` and `arg1` fields to the =
`method_args` union. Is there some reason that the existing `left` and =
`right` fields wouldn't work?=20

The left-right ended-up being more of a brain teaser to work with in =
jsonpath_exec.
Until before these methods, the opt_datetime_template was the only =
argument passed in existing jsonpath functions,=20
So initially I used that as a template to add to the scann-parser infra,
but then realized it may make morese sense to have a way to access =
indexed-args.
IIRC, with an eye in the future I found it much more convenient - less =
of the  to work with indexed-args.
I should have gone back and use them for *TRIM_P too
But you may be onto something with the split_part thing.

> The existing string() method operates on a "JSON boolean, number, =
string, or datetime"; should these functions also operate on all those =
data types?

You mean implicitely conversion to string first?
I don=E2=80=99t think so: I=E2=80=99d expect to work like =
=E2=80=98$=E2=80=A6string().replace()=E2=80=A6'

> I'm not sure how well these functions comply with the SQL spec.

The fact that Peter hasn=E2=80=99t raized this as an issue, makes me =
think it's not one