| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Florian Pflug <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PG Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Boolean operators without commutators vs. ALL/ANY |
| Date: | 2011-06-16 04:50:17 |
| Message-ID: | 17580.1308199817@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:
> On tis, 2011-06-14 at 15:38 +0200, Florian Pflug wrote:
>> BTW, there's actually precedent for a commutator of "~", namely
>> "@". Some of the geometric types (polygon, box, circle, point,
>> path) use "~" as a commutator for "@" (which stands for "contains").
> I wouldn't have a problem with naming the reverse operator "@".
We deprecated those names for the geometric operators largely because
there wasn't any visual correlation between the commutator pairs.
I can't see introducing the same pairing for regex operators if we
already decided the geometric case was a bad idea.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2011-06-16 05:11:35 | Re: [WIP] Support for "ANY/ALL(array) op scalar" (Was: Re: Boolean operators without commutators vs. ALL/ANY) |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2011-06-16 04:47:32 | Re: pg_upgrade using appname to lock out other users |