Euler Taveira de Oliveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com> writes:
> Tom Lane escreveu:
>> ISTM your
>> argument can be reduced to "there should be no hidden values ever", but
>> I doubt we're going to buy that.
> No, the "hidden values" has their use case (hiding legal values that we don't
> want to expose, for example, true/false, 0/1, yes/no).
Right ... that's exactly what these are, IMO.
regards, tom lane