Re: Proposal: variant of regclass

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: Pavel Golub <pavel(at)gf(dot)microolap(dot)com>, Pavel Golub <pavel(at)microolap(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Proposal: variant of regclass
Date: 2013-12-05 15:08:48
Message-ID: 15367.1386256128@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> We could invent some sneaky syntax variants, like 'pg_klass'::regclass
> errors, but '?pg_klass'::regclass does not.

Hmm ... cute idea, but shoehorning it into regoperator might be
problematic. You'd have to pick a flag character that wasn't a
valid operator character, which lets out '?' as well as a lot
of the other mnemonically-reasonable choices.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2013-12-05 15:10:39 Re: Performance optimization of btree binary search
Previous Message Tom Lane 2013-12-05 15:02:56 Re: Performance optimization of btree binary search