On Jun29, 2011, at 18:34 , Robert Haas wrote:
> It also seems a bit strange to me that we're contemplating a system
> where users are always going to have to cast the return type.
> Generally, casts are annoying and we want to minimize the need for
> them. I'm not sure what the alternative is, though, unless we create
> separate constructor functions for each type: int8range_cc(1, 2).
Well, if we want multiple range types per base type (which we do), then
the user needs to specify which one to use somehow. A cast seems the most
natural way to do that to me - after all, casting is *the* way to coerce
value to a certain type.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Florian Pflug||Date: 2011-06-29 17:13:55|
|Subject: Re: Range Types, constructors, and the type system|
|Previous:||From: Robert Haas||Date: 2011-06-29 17:07:25|
|Subject: Re: Re: starting to review the Extend NOT NULL
representation to pg_constraint patch|