On Tue, Dec 19, 2006 at 08:09:47AM +0000, Heikki Linnakangas wrote: > Tom Dunstan wrote: > >Here is an updated version of the enums patch. It has been brought up to > >date and applies against current CVS HEAD. The original email is at [1], > >and describes the implementation. > > I'm sorry I missed the original discussions, but I have to ask: Why do > we want enums in core? The only potential advantage I can see over using > a look-up table and FK references is performance.
A natural ordering is another. I'd love to be able to make a type color that has Red Orange Yellow Green Blue Indigo Violet and then be able to do an ORDER BY color; > And I'd rather spend time improving the performance of FK checks > than add extra machinery to do the same thing in a different way. Not the same thing. > Ignoring my general dislike of enums, I have a few issues with the patch > as it is: > > 1. What's the point of having comparison operators for enums? For most > use cases, there's no natural ordering of enum values. A natural ordering is precisely the use case for enums. Otherwise, you just use a FK to a one-column table and have done. Cheers, D -- David Fetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://fetter.org/ phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Skype: davidfetter Remember to vote! ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
