Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > "Kevin Grittner" <kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov> writes: >> No, that's not it. I'm wondering why it isn't treated as text. >> Period. Full stop. Nothing to infer. > > Because then we would have to provide implicit casts from text to > everything else, which would be horribly dangerous. I would like that even less. I like errors on type conflicts. >> In my view, it is wrong that any of those work. I would expect to >> have to code one of these: > >> select now() < date '2009-01-01'; -- implicit casts should cover >> select now() < timestamp with time zone '2009-01-01 00:00:00.0'; > > The current design is a compromise between usability and strictness > of semantics. This proposal appears to be all strictness and no > usability. I was not proposing anything; I was trying to understand the reasons for the current behavior so that I could think about what might make sense to address some of the places where current behavior causes a result which is different from a non-error result should be obtained under the standard. I couldn't begin to anticipate what might be acceptable in these situations without understanding the reason things are as they are. I do understand that there will be "convenience" extensions to the standard -- all products do that. I wasn't sure whether that was the reason for the behavior or whether there was something else in play. Thanks for clarifying, -Kevin
-- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
