| From: | Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Rod Taylor <rod(dot)taylor(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: record identical operator |
| Date: | 2013-09-17 13:14:52 |
| Message-ID: | 523855CC.60103@2ndQuadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 09/17/2013 02:46 PM, Rod Taylor wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 8:23 AM, Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com
> <mailto:kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com>> wrote:
>
>
> Of course, that begs the question of whether == is already "taken".
> If not, we could knock one '=' off of everything above except for
> "equals". What existing uses are known for == ?
>
>
> == is already taken as a common typo in plpgsql scripts. I strongly
> prefer if this remained an error.
>
> IF foo == bar THEN ...
That was also my reason for not suggesting == .
It is too widely used in other systems for simple equality check.
--
Hannu Krosing
PostgreSQL Consultant
Performance, Scalability and High Availability
2ndQuadrant Nordic OÜ
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Hannu Krosing | 2013-09-17 13:30:29 | Re: record identical operator |
| Previous Message | Alexander Korotkov | 2013-09-17 13:04:19 | Re: Fix picksplit with nan values |