| From: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org, lr(at)pcorp(dot)us |
| Subject: | Re: Domains versus polymorphic functions, redux |
| Date: | 2011-05-24 16:46:08 |
| Message-ID: | 88B40BE3-7E63-40A8-AA87-0564476ACC6B@kineticode.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On May 24, 2011, at 9:12 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> An alternative rule we could use in place of #2 is just "smash domains
> to base types always, when they're matched to ANYELEMENT". That would
> be simpler and more in keeping with #1, but it might change the behavior
> in cases where the historical behavior is reasonable (unlike the cases
> discussed in my message referenced above...) I find this simpler rule
> tempting from an implementor's standpoint, but am unsure if there'll be
> complaints.
I'm not sure where the historical behavior manifests, but this certainly seems like it might be the most consistent implementation, as well. Which option is least likely to violate the principal of surprise?
Best,
David
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Greg Smith | 2011-05-24 16:52:00 | Re: 9.2 schedule |
| Previous Message | Merlin Moncure | 2011-05-24 16:44:01 | Re: Domains versus polymorphic functions, redux |