Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> FWIW, is the attached patch about what you had in mind? (It probably only
> covers "normal" types at the moment.)
Hm, I hadn't realized that it would take as little work as that ...
I have an itchy feeling that you missed something but I'm not sure
what.
One thing I had wanted to do is take out the existing functions and
pg_cast entries that are effectively just providing hard-wired
equivalents to this, but that's merely housekeeping.
regards, tom lane