Re: remove convert using

Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
>
>> The attached patch removes "convert ... using ..." as recently discussed
>> on -hackers. Most of the patch is regression test changes.
>>
>
> You should be able to remove CONVERT as a grammar keyword altogether
> -- the remaining production for CONVERT as a function name seems dead
> weight now (not to mention that it prevents having user-defined
> functions named CONVERT).
>
>
>

I wonderted a bit about that. I thought it might be better to leave it
in case we wanted to put back "convert using" when we have better
support for multiple encodings (and maybe when we understand better what
it is actually supposed to do).

But I have no strong opinions on the subject.

cheers

anmdrew