| From: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Document NULL |
| Date: | 2024-05-11 18:00:47 |
| Message-ID: | CAKFQuwbZU1jB5AxcGnm1BqWeAst4UyiqPCTV6eH38URaM5kgtQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Saturday, May 11, 2024, Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Sat, May 11, 2024, 16:34 David G. Johnston <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
>
> My plan is to have a v4 out next week, without or without a review of this
>> draft, but then the subsequent few weeks will probably be a bit quiet.
>>
>
> + The cardinal rule, a given null value is never
> + <link linkend="functions-comparison-op-table">equal or unequal</link>
> + to any other non-null.
>
> Again, doesn't this imply it tends to be equal to another null by its
> omission?
>
>
I still agree, it’s just a typo now…
…is never equal or unequal to any value.
Though I haven’t settled on a phrasing I really like. But I’m trying to
avoid a parenthetical.
David J.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tomas Vondra | 2024-05-11 19:18:21 | Re: BitmapHeapScan streaming read user and prelim refactoring |
| Previous Message | Thom Brown | 2024-05-11 17:51:37 | Re: Document NULL |