| From: | Florian Pflug <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PG Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Boolean operators without commutators vs. ALL/ANY |
| Date: | 2011-06-14 10:05:45 |
| Message-ID: | 0E1A7850-F26F-4391-9DBF-00341CE71686@phlo.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Jun13, 2011, at 16:19 , Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> On 06/13/2011 10:07 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> Some languages use =~ and some use just ~... I was just
>> wondering if anyone thought the commutator of =~ was ~=...
>
> My feeling is it's a bit dangerous. It's too easy to fat-finger the reverse op, and get something quite unintended.
Well, but with "~" you need to *remember* that the regexp
goes on the right side and the text on the left. That seems
worse than the risk of fat-fingering "=~" and getting "~=".
At, at least, have looked up the argument order of "~"
countless in the past...
best regards,
Florian Pflug
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Florian Pflug | 2011-06-14 10:10:18 | Re: Boolean operators without commutators vs. ALL/ANY |
| Previous Message | Florian Pflug | 2011-06-14 09:56:31 | Re: [PATCH] Bug in XPATH() if expression returns a scalar value |