> Magnus Hagander <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net> writes:
> > Summary of MS:
> > When it runs in ANSI mode, null != null.
> > When it runs in backwards compatible mode , null=null.
> 
> Oh, that's interesting, they fixed their bug.
> 
> foo = NULL should produce NULL (*not* true, and *not* false either,
> though it'd act like false in a CASE test).
> 
> Here is one vote for ripping out our parser kluge and making null act
> like it should according to the spec.  Comments?

I thought our only kludge was allowing = NULL because we got tons of MS
folks complaining in the past before we did this.  Are you thinking that
the newer MS versions will not give us a problem.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us               |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

In response to

• Re: comparing rows at 2000-08-03 13:55:35 from Tom Lane

Responses

• Re: comparing rows at 2000-08-03 14:40:24 from Tom Lane

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:	From: Don Baccus	Date: 2000-08-03 14:32:36
	Subject: Re: comparing rows
Previous:	From: Tom Lane	Date: 2000-08-03 14:23:15
	Subject: Re: comparing rows