Re: Poll: are people okay with function/operator table redesign?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Tom Lane
Тема Re: Poll: are people okay with function/operator table redesign?
Дата
Msg-id 6655.1587165419@sss.pgh.pa.us
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Poll: are people okay with function/operator table redesign?  ("David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>)
Ответы Re: Poll: are people okay with function/operator table redesign?
Список pgsql-hackers
"David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com> writes:
> On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 4:04 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> Especially not for unary operators, where
>> ALTER OPERATOR would have us write "- (NONE, integer)".

> I'd drop the parens for unary and just write "- integer"

We do have some postfix operators still ... although it looks like
there's only one in core.  In any case, the signature line is *the*
thing that is supposed to specify what the syntax is, so I'm not
too pleased with using an ambiguous notation for it.

            regards, tom lane



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: "David G. Johnston"
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Poll: are people okay with function/operator table redesign?
Следующее
От: Alvaro Herrera
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Support for DATETIMEOFFSET