Re: Precedence of '|' operator (was Re: [patch,rfc] binary operators on integers)

From: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Marko Kreen <marko(at)l-t(dot)ee>, PostgreSQL Development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Precedence of '|' operator (was Re: [patch,rfc] binary operators on integers)
Date: 2000-10-16 15:13:10
Message-ID: 39EB1B06.B1A0A3C1@alumni.caltech.edu
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> Well, that's a good point --- it isn't going to get any less painful to
> fix it later. Do we want to just remove the special treatment of '|'
> and let it become one with the undifferentiated mass of Op, or do we
> want to try to set up reasonable precedence for all the bitwise
> operators (and if so, what should that be)? The second choice has a
> greater chance of breaking existing apps because it's changing more
> operators ...
> Thomas, any opinions here?

I'd like to see closer adherence to the "usual" operator precedence. But
I really *hate* having to explicitly call out each rule in the a_expr,
b_expr, and/or c_expr productions. Any way around this?

- Thomas

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Mikheev, Vadim 2000-10-16 15:13:14 New file naming
Previous Message Michael Meskes 2000-10-16 15:05:24 7.1 and ecpg