Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> OK. I was thinking that instead moving this into
> eval_const_expressions(), we just make the logic in
> find_coercion_pathway() call the "exemptor" function (or whatever we
> call it) right around here:
No, no, no, no. Didn't you read yesterday's discussion? parse_coerce
is entirely the wrong place for this.
regards, tom lane