On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 06:31:38PM -0400, Steve Singer wrote: > I think there is agreement that better (as in more obscure) > operators than === and !== need to be picked and we need to find a > place in the user-docs to warn users of the behaviour of this > operators. Hannu has proposed > > *==* "binary equal, surely very equal by any other definition as wall" > !==? "maybe not equal" -- "binary inequal, may still be equal by > other comparison methods"
It's a pity operators must be non-alpha and can't be named. Something
like:
SELECT foo OPERATOR("byte_equivalent") bar;
is simultaneously obscure, yet clear.
Have a nice day,
--
Martijn van Oosterhout <klep...@svana.org> http://svana.org/kleptog/
> He who writes carelessly confesses thereby at the very outset that he does
> not attach much importance to his own thoughts.
-- Arthur Schopenhauer
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
