ToDo: add documentation for operator IS OF

Hello,

I miss doc for this operator

Regards
Pavel Stehule

_________________________________________________________________
Emotikony a pozadi programu MSN Messenger ozivi vasi konverzaci.
http://messenger.msn.cz/

Pavel Stehule wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I miss doc for this operator

Strang IS [NOT] OF wasn't documented, especially seeing it was added in
PostgreSQL 7.3. Anyway, documented and backpatched to 8.2.X.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Pavel Stehule wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I miss doc for this operator
>
> Strang IS [NOT] OF wasn't documented, especially seeing it was added in
> PostgreSQL 7.3. Anyway, documented and backpatched to 8.2.X.

Here's the reason -- see this thread:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2003-08/msg00062.php

Joe

Joe Conway wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Pavel Stehule wrote:
> >> Hello,
> >>
> >> I miss doc for this operator
> >
> > Strang IS [NOT] OF wasn't documented, especially seeing it was added in
> > PostgreSQL 7.3. Anyway, documented and backpatched to 8.2.X.
>
> Here's the reason -- see this thread:
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2003-08/msg00062.php

Wow, interesting. I do remember that now. Should I revert the
documentation addition and add a comment to gram.y?

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

>Joe Conway wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > Pavel Stehule wrote:
> > >> Hello,
> > >>
> > >> I miss doc for this operator
> > >
> > > Strang IS [NOT] OF wasn't documented, especially seeing it was added
>in
> > > PostgreSQL 7.3. Anyway, documented and backpatched to 8.2.X.
> >
> > Here's the reason -- see this thread:
> > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2003-08/msg00062.php
>
>Wow, interesting. I do remember that now. Should I revert the
>documentation addition and add a comment to gram.y?
>

Nobody worked on this subject a lot of years. Who need it, knows about it
and use it. I am for this topic is documented and in doc is note about
difference from standard and about some incompletness of this operator.

regards
Pavel Stehule

_________________________________________________________________
Chcete sdilet sve obrazky a hudbu s prateli? http://messenger.msn.cz/

"Pavel Stehule" <pavel(dot)stehule(at)hotmail(dot)com> writes:
> Nobody worked on this subject a lot of years. Who need it, knows about it
> and use it. I am for this topic is documented and in doc is note about
> difference from standard and about some incompletness of this operator.

Once we document it there's going to be a backward-compatibility issue
for any proposals to fix it. And I do think it is broken in a number
of ways:
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2003-08/msg00060.php

Per the link Joe cited, I'm not real thrilled with the spec's special
treatment of NULL, but I'd like to see us fix IS OF so that it can be
a substitute for testing tableoid to see which child table a tuple
came from. And we definitely need to consider the domain issue.

regards, tom lane

Am Dienstag, 20. Februar 2007 02:13 schrieb Bruce Momjian:
> Wow, interesting. I do remember that now. Should I revert the
> documentation addition and add a comment to gram.y?

I'd say remove the code.

--
Peter Eisentraut
http://developer.postgresql.org/~petere/

>Am Dienstag, 20. Februar 2007 02:13 schrieb Bruce Momjian:
> > Wow, interesting. I do remember that now. Should I revert the
> > documentation addition and add a comment to gram.y?
>
>I'd say remove the code.
>

Propably nobody use it for inheritancy, but some people (I am too) use it in
polymorphic functions. You can remove it, but please replace it.

Regards
Pavel Stehule

_________________________________________________________________
Chcete sdilet sve obrazky a hudbu s prateli? http://messenger.msn.cz/