Jelte Fennema-Nio <postg...@jeltef.nl> writes:
> 4. For the custom type that I'm implementing the subscripting for, I
> really don't want such a prefix.
Hm. If we made this behavior type-specific then you could have what
you want without having to break any existing expectations at all.
However, after thinking a little longer I seem to recall that we've
previously looked into the idea of deriving the default aliases from
the post-parse-analysis tree. We gave up because there were too many
cases where the behavior would change, or at least it looked unduly
painful to prevent that. For instance, something that looks like a
function call in the raw tree could parse to half a dozen different
kinds of nodes. So I'm not sure how we get there from here.
regards, tom lane
