Re: operator dependency of commutator and negator, redux

On 20 December 2012 11:51, Tom Lane  wrote:
>
> While reconsidering the various not-too-satisfactory fixes we thought of
> back then, I had a sudden thought.  Instead of having a COMMUTATOR or
> NEGATOR forward reference create a "shell" operator and link to it,
> why not simply *ignore* such references?  Then when the second operator
> is defined, go ahead and fill in both links?


Ignore with warning sounds pretty good.  So it would go something like this?

# CREATE OPERATOR < (... COMMUTATOR >);
WARNING: COMMUTATOR > (foo, foo) undefined, ignoring.
CREATE OPERATOR

# CREATE OPERATOR > (... COMMUTATOR <);
CREATE OPERATOR


Cheers,
BJ