| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Proposal for resolving casting issues |
| Date: | 2002-09-17 19:26:20 |
| Message-ID: | 2051.1032290780@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> I need a clarification. In the non-assignment case, does:
> WHERE numericcol = numericcol * 3.14159
> evaluate "numericcol * 3.14159" as a numeric?
Yup (given my proposed changes that is).
> And does:
> WHERE 5.55 = numericcol * 3.14159
> evaluate "numericcol * 3.14159" as a numeric too?
Yup. The context does not matter: when we have foo * bar, we are going
to decide which kind of * operator is meant without regard to
surrounding context. It's very much a bottom-up process, and has to be.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-09-17 19:59:14 | Re: RPMS for 7.3 beta. |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-09-17 19:14:41 | Re: Proposal for resolving casting issues |