Re: Boolean operators without commutators vs. ALL/ANY

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Florian Pflug <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org>, PG Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Boolean operators without commutators vs. ALL/ANY
Date: 2011-06-16 04:38:14
Message-ID: 1308199094.30501.0.camel@vanquo.pezone.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On mån, 2011-06-13 at 10:19 -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> On 06/13/2011 10:07 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
> > Some languages use =~ and some use just ~... I was just
> > wondering if anyone thought the commutator of =~ was ~=...
>
> My feeling is it's a bit dangerous. It's too easy to fat-finger the
> reverse op, and get something quite unintended.

Yes, it looked highly dangerous to me as well.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2011-06-16 04:39:17 Re: Boolean operators without commutators vs. ALL/ANY
Previous Message Ross J. Reedstrom 2011-06-16 04:22:51 Re: pg_upgrade using appname to lock out other users