Re: [HACKERS] Numeric with '-'
От | Peter Eisentraut |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Numeric with '-' |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Pine.LNX.4.21.0002220031170.349-100000@localhost.localdomain обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Numeric with '-' (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Numeric with '-'
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 2000-02-21, Tom Lane mentioned: > I've been ranting about this in a recent pghackers thread ;-). > The lexer shouldn't have to commit to a conversion to float8 > in order to report that a token looks like a numeric literal. Has the ranting resulted in any idea yet? ISTM that keeping a non-integer number as a string all the way to the executor shouldn't hurt too much. After all, according to SQL 123.45 *is* a NUMERIC literal! By making it a float we're making our users liable to breaking all kinds of fiscal regulations in some places. (Ask Jan.) > The resulting error message > ERROR: Unable to convert left operator '-' from type 'unknown' > isn't exactly up to a high standard of clarity either; Speaking of 'unknown', this is my favourite brain-damaged query of all times: peter=> select 'a' like 'a'; ERROR: Unable to identify an operator '~~' for types 'unknown' and 'unknown' You will have to retype this query usingan explicit cast Is there a good reason that a character literal is unknown? I'm sure the reasons lie somewhere in the extensible type system, but if I wanted it to be something else explicitly then I would have written DATE 'yesterday'. -- Peter Eisentraut Sernanders väg 10:115 peter_e@gmx.net 75262 Uppsala http://yi.org/peter-e/ Sweden
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: