Re: Bug in date arithmetic

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>
Cc: David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, PG Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Bug in date arithmetic
Date: 2009-08-24 20:19:10
Message-ID: 6196.1251145150@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> writes:
> I wonder if we could get around this by inventing a new type
> date_or_interval which looks at the input and decides which it is
> using fairly strict rules. date_sub would take that type and do the
> appropriate operation based on what the constant had in it.

Ick. This would be a pretty enormous blot on the type system to solve
one special case, in a manner that would only be helpful to newbies
who don't know that they ought to cast to eliminate the ambiguity.

In fact it sounds quite a bit like the implicit-cast-to-text situations
we just finished getting rid of ...

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Fetter 2009-08-24 20:35:29 Re: Bug in date arithmetic
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2009-08-24 20:17:23 Re: Feedback about Drupal SQL debugging