| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: deprecating =>, take two |
| Date: | 2010-06-21 16:40:34 |
| Message-ID: | 1277138321-sup-383@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of lun jun 21 12:20:59 -0400 2010:
> Barring vigorous objections, I will apply these tomorrow so that we
> can consider deprecating => as an operator name in 9.1, for better
> compliance with the SQL standard.
Maybe this is just a matter of semantics, but I thought we were going to
deprecate => in 9.0 so that people started to avoid its use altogether.
Why wait till 9.1 to recommend avoidance?
I had imagined that 9.1 was going to ban => altogether.
--
Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Marc G. Fournier | 2010-06-21 16:41:40 | Upgrade procedure for 9.0 with HS/SR ... ? |
| Previous Message | David E. Wheeler | 2010-06-21 16:37:46 | Re: deprecating =>, take two |