From: | sad <sad(at)bankir(dot)ru> |
---|---|
To: | Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone(dot)bigpanda(dot)com> |
Cc: | Michael Glaesemann <grzm(at)myrealbox(dot)com>, pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: casting BOOL to somthng |
Date: | 2004-09-01 05:41:54 |
Message-ID: | 200409010941.54539.sad@bankir.ru |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-sql |
On Wednesday 01 September 2004 09:24, Stephan Szabo wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Sep 2004, sad wrote:
> > On Tuesday 31 August 2004 17:49, Michael Glaesemann wrote:
> > > On Aug 31, 2004, at 8:24 PM, sad wrote:
> > > > and i am still desire to know _WHY_ there are no predefined cast for
> > > > BOOL ?
> > > > and at the same time there are predefined casts for INT and
> > > > FLOAT......
> > >
> > > I think the main reason is what is the proper textual representation of
> > > BOOLEAN? True, PostgreSQL returns 't' as a representation for the
> > > BOOLEAN value TRUE, but some people might want it to return 'TRUE' or
> > > 'true' or other representations. Picking one is perhaps arbitrary.
> >
> > There are many (infinite number) of INT representations,
> > "Picking one is perhaps arbitrary." But you poke one and using it.
>
> There's a fairly accepted convention for integer representations.
> There's no such convention for boolean representations.
then why do you print its value on a screen ?!
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | sad | 2004-09-01 05:55:45 | Re: casting BOOL to somthng |
Previous Message | Stephan Szabo | 2004-09-01 05:24:59 | Re: casting BOOL to somthng |