Re: why isn't TEXT a key word?

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: culley harrelson <culley(at)fastmail(dot)fm>
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: why isn't TEXT a key word?
Date: 2004-01-15 22:00:06
Message-ID: 24881.1074204006@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

culley harrelson <culley(at)fastmail(dot)fm> writes:
> I thought it was strange that TEXT, a data type, is not a key word.

Why would you think that? Given that Postgres has an extensible type
system, we'd hardly want type names to be keywords. They're just
identifiers.

We do have keywords for some types that are mandated to have special
syntax by the SQL spec, such as "character varying(n)", because they
need special processing in the grammar.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Phil Campaigne 2004-01-15 22:56:15 What Version Installed?
Previous Message Jan Wieck 2004-01-15 21:34:20 Re: How are NULLS stored on disk for PG 7.4?