RE: [HACKERS] A small problem with the new inet and cidr types

From: "Taral" <taral(at)mail(dot)utexas(dot)edu>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "D'Arcy J(dot)M(dot) Cain" <darcy(at)druid(dot)net>
Cc: <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: RE: [HACKERS] A small problem with the new inet and cidr types
Date: 1998-11-02 18:31:23
Message-ID: 000001be068e$fe4351e0$3b291f0a@taral
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> My guess is that maybe this should not be fixed in the individual
> datatypes at all; instead the generic function and operator code should
> be modified so that if any input value is NULL, then NULL is returned as
> the result without ever calling the datatype-specific code.

AFAICT, the function code returns blank when the input is NULL, regardless
of the function definition... this came up before when someone tried to
extend the functions and found that func(NULL) called func, but disregarded
the return value...

Taral

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 1998-11-02 18:35:43 Re: [HACKERS] A small problem with the new inet and cidr types
Previous Message D'Arcy J.M. Cain 1998-11-02 18:06:38 Re: [HACKERS] A small problem with the new inet and cidr types