To: Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>
Cc: Rajesh Kumar Mallah <mallah@trade-india.com>,
	pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: array_lower /array_prepend doubt 
In-reply-to: <400EC94F.7010703@joeconway.com> 
References: <400E85EC.4000106@trade-india.com> <1648.1074705270@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<400EBEF0.6060005@joeconway.com>
	<2597.1074708698@sss.pgh.pa.us> <400EC6A2.20007@joeconway.com>
	<8803.1074710460@sss.pgh.pa.us> <400EC94F.7010703@joeconway.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>
	message dated "Wed, 21 Jan 2004 10:47:43 -0800"
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 14:15:51 -0500
Message-ID: <11796.1074712551@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com> writes:
> We may need another extension to the array literal syntax in 
> order to deal with this. I'll report back after I've had some time to 
> study it.

There already is support in array_in for specification of the array
dimensions (though it may be suffering bit rot for lack of use/testing).
I think the main thing needed is some thought about when array_out
should print dimensions; we don't want it doing so all the time, for
both clutter and backwards compatibility reasons.  Maybe "whenever any
lower bound is not 1" would do; or maybe we want to invent a GUC switch
to control its behavior.

			regards, tom lane