User's Guide section 7.2, example 7-1, claims that SELECT 2 ^ 3 AS "Exp";
will be equivalent, after type resolution, to SELECT CAST(2 AS double precision) ^ CAST(3 AS double precision) AS "Exp"; (which is true) or SELECT 2.0 ^ 3.0 AS "Exp"; which is not true, since 2.0 and 3.0 are nowadays of type numeric. Rather than deleting the third branch of this claim (which would also imply deleting the subsequent Note), does anyone want to think of a new example? Related observations: The premise of the example is that the operator ^ only exists for double precision arguments. ^ is implemented using SQL function dpow, which is implemented using C function dpow. There's also a documented SQL function pow, which is implemented using C function dpow. Wouldn't it be enough to have the documented SQL function pow and the operator on top of that? There's also a documented SQL function pow for "numeric", but no operator for it. Should that be added? -- Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 1: subscribe and unsubscribe commands go to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
