On Oct11, 2011, at 14:43 , David Fetter wrote:
> I'd recoil at not having ranges default to left-closed, right-open.
> The use case for that one is so compelling that I'm OK with making it
> the default from which deviations need to be specified.
The downside of that is that, as Tom pointed out upthread, we cannot
make [) the canonical representation of ranges. It'd require us to
increment the right boundary of a closed range, but that incremented
boundary might no longer be in the base type's domain.
So we'd end up with [) being the default for range construction,
but [] being the canonical representation, i.e. what you get back
when SELECTing a range (over a discrete base type).
Certainly not the end of the world, but is the convenience of being
able to write somerange(a, b) instead of somerange(a, b, '[)') really
worth it? I kind of doubt that...
best regards,
Florian Pflug