Re: [HACKERS] Numeric with '-'
От | Peter Eisentraut |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Numeric with '-' |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Pine.LNX.4.21.0002230151000.415-100000@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: > > 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'. > > Remember that constants of random types like "line segment" have to > start out as character literals A constant of type line segment looks like this: LSEG 'whatever' This is an obvious extension of the standard. (Also note that this is *not* a cast.) The semantics of SQL throughout are that if I write something of the form quote-characters-quote, it's a character literal. No questions asked. Now if I pass a character literal to a datetimeish function, it's on obvious cast. If I pass it to a geometry function, it's an obvious cast. If I pass it to a generic function, it's a character string. It seems that for the benefit of a small crowd -- those actually using geometric types and being too lazy to type their literals in the above manner -- we are creating all sorts of problems for two much larger crowds: those trying to use their databases in an normal manner with strings and numbers, and those trying develop for this database that never know what type a literal is, when it should be obvious. I am definitely for a close examination of this one. -- 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: