I don't see how that helps your argument that NULLs shouldn't be
convertible.
2016-07-28 23:01 GMT+03:00 David G. Johnston <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>:
> On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 3:54 PM, Jordan Gigov <coladict@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> So, you're saying SQL is too sane a language for you and you'd rather
>> have 30+ non-convertible types of null?
>>
>
> =E2=80=8BSELECT 1::int =3D '1'::text; -- ERROR: operator does not exist: =
integer =3D
> text
>
> David J.
>
>