Re: Proposal: revert behavior of IS NULL on row types

>>>>> "David" == David G Johnston <david.g.johnston@gmail.com> writes:
>> Prohibiting IS NOT NULL is not on the cards; it's very widely used.
David> ​Yet changing how it behaves, invisibly, is?

Did you mean prohibiting it only for composite-type args? It's obviously
widely used for non-composite args.

I would expect that >95% of cases where someone has written (x IS NOT
NULL) for x being a composite type, it's actually a bug and that NOT (x
IS NULL) was intended.

--
Andrew (irc:RhodiumToad)