On Sat, 2004-10-23 at 17:25 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> > SELECT to_number('485-', '999S');
> > to_number
> > -----------
> > 485
>
> > Is this a bug or intentional?
>
> Tracing through this, it looks like the problem is that NUM_processor()
> has no switch case for NUM_S (nor does the default case raise an error,
> which seems a risky practice to me).
>
> Karel, can you verify this and submit a fix?
Yes, you're right. It strange, but NUM_S missing there. The conversion
from string to number is less stable part of formatting.c...
I have already 2000 lines of code of new generation of to_..()
functions. But all will available in 8.1.
The patch is in the attachment.
Karel
--
Karel Zak
http://home.zf.jcu.cz/~zakkr