Re: RfD: more powerful "any" types

Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> writes:
> 2009/9/10 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>:
>> 1. Allow the existing "any" pseudotype as an input argument type for PLs.
>> (AFAICS this is simple and painless; about the only question is whether
>> we want to keep using the name "any", which because of conflicting with
>> a reserved word would always need the double quotes.)

> I thing so this is possible - I see only one critical point - you
> cannot validate source in validation time.

How's it any different from anyelement?
        regards, tom lane