Re: Domains and function arguments

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Peter Eisentraut
Тема Re: Domains and function arguments
Дата
Msg-id Pine.LNX.4.44.0306171513380.2043-100000@peter.localdomain
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: Domains and function arguments  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Ответы Re: Domains and function arguments  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Список pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane writes:

> Admittedly, we have trouble resolving the type to use when a function is
> overloaded with both a domain and a base type, but that's hardly
> surprising.

Even if you try to work it out, it's going to be a mess.  During
resolution, you would have to look inside the data to figure out which
domain, if any, it might fit into.  That means that the resolution of an
expression depends on the actual data, not just the structure of the data
(i.e., the data type).  Of course, an expression typically needs to be
resolved before the data is plugged in, so this approach cannot work.

If you insist on allowing domains in argument lists, then I think the best
approach is this:  For purpose of function resolution, types and all
domains defined over them are equivalent.  That would mean, for example,
that if you define positive_int as domain over int, then you cannot define
foofunc(int) and foofunc(positive_int) as the same time.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut   peter_e@gmx.net



В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Bruno Wolff III
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Errors compiling hba.c in current CVS
Следующее
От: Peter Eisentraut
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Our FLOAT(p) precision does not conform to spec