Re: Some array semantics issues

Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> writes:
> And changing that would make it harder to test just the contents of the array
> without having to match bounds as well.

Fair point, but currently it's impossible to make a comparison that
*does* consider the bounds, which one would think would be the ordinary
meaning of equality.

> I'm not entirely against the idea of making array bounds significant
> but I guess we would need some convenient way of taking them out of
> the picture too. Perhaps another equality operator.

I could go for a separate operator that has the current behavior
(might as well ignore number of dimensions too, if we're going to
ignore bounds). Any thoughts about the operator name?

regards, tom lane