Re: BIT/BIT VARYING names (was Re: [HACKERS] Beta for 4:30AST)

On Wed, 1 Mar 2000, Tom Lane wrote:

> Well, no, it becomes "bit varying", *with* quotes, if the dumper is
> not broken.

I know, but consider psql and others just using plain libpq functionality.

> for bit and bit varying. If you can find a way to avoid
> that special-case logic, I'll get a lot more excited about not
> having to treat "bit varying" as a special-case name.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO. I'm not trying to treat "bit varying" as a special case
name. I want to treat it as a normal name. There's absolutely no
difference whether the pg_type entry for the type represented by the
tokens BIT VARYING is "varbit", "bit varying", or "foo". I'm just saying
that the second would be more obvious and convenient, but that it would
require a small fix somewhere.

We're not going to allow any usertype(x) syntax in this life time, are we,
and the fact remains that we have to parse the reserved-word SQL types
separately. But this has all nothing to do with what I'm saying. Why
doesn't anyone understand me?

--
Peter Eisentraut Sernanders väg 10:115
peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net 75262 Uppsala
http://yi.org/peter-e/ Sweden