I don't see how that helps your argument that NULLs shouldn't be
convertible.
2016-07-28 23:01 GMT+03:00 David G. Johnston <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>:
> On Thu, Jul 28, 2016 at 3:54 PM, Jordan Gigov <coladict(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> So, you're saying SQL is too sane a language for you and you'd rather
>> have 30+ non-convertible types of null?
>>
>
> SELECT 1::int = '1'::text; -- ERROR: operator does not exist: integer =
> text
>
> David J.
>
>