Andreas Pflug <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de> writes:
> Now the patch is *really* appended :-)
And rejected. You cannot assume that an operator is commutative or
associative just because it has a name you think ought to be.
(For a counter-example, it's well known that floating-point addition
is not associative.)
More: if the tree structure for ops of equal precedence looks like
a + (b + c), then it's a near certainty that the user wrote those
parentheses. Why would you think that removing them is pretty-printing?
regards, tom lane
In response to
pgsql-patches by date
|Next:||From: Tom Lane||Date: 2003-07-31 13:43:21|
|Subject: Re: Proof-of-concept for initdb-time shared_buffers selection |
|Previous:||From: Manfred Koizar||Date: 2003-07-31 10:38:23|
|Subject: Re: Proof-of-concept for initdb-time shared_buffers selection|