Re: casting BOOL to somthng

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 ?!

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-sql by date

  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