On 2018/02/05 13:20, Ashutosh Bapat wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 2:23 PM, Amit Langote
> <Langote_Amit_f8@lab.ntt.co.jp> wrote:
>>
>> Yeah, the patch in its current form is wrong, because it will give wrong
>> answers if the operator being used in a SAOP is non-strict. I modified
>> the patch to consider operator strictness before doing anything with nulls.
>
> That's fine, but I am not sure whether this fits constraint
> exclusion's charter. Please add this patch to the next commitfest so
> that we can have a better opinion.
OK, done.
Thanks,
Amit