Re: [WIP] Support for "ANY/ALL(array) op scalar" (Was: Re: Boolean operators without commutators vs. ALL/ANY)

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Florian Pflug <fgp(at)phlo(dot)org>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PG Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [WIP] Support for "ANY/ALL(array) op scalar" (Was: Re: Boolean operators without commutators vs. ALL/ANY)
Date: 2011-06-16 04:40:36
Message-ID: 1308199236.30501.2.camel@vanquo.pezone.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On ons, 2011-06-15 at 22:19 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> (FWIW, I've come around to liking the idea of using =~ and the obvious
> variants of that for regex operators, mainly because of the Perl
> precedent.)

Maybe I'm not completely up to date on this, but I observe that Perl
itself doesn't appear to have a commutator for =~ .

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2011-06-16 04:47:32 Re: pg_upgrade using appname to lock out other users
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2011-06-16 04:39:17 Re: Boolean operators without commutators vs. ALL/ANY