Re: Tom Lane > > We might be able to simply delete the @ operators, but doesn't this > > new check break the general possibility to have more than one spelling > > for the same operator? > > You can have more than one operator atop the same function. > But why didn't you make the @ operators commutators of each other, > rather than this mess?
Historical something. You are right that the commutators could be fixed that way, but the negators are a different question. There is no legacy spelling for these. Anyway, if this doesn't raise any "oh we didn't think of this" concerns, we'll just remove the old operators in pgsphere. Christoph
