| From: | Marc Britten <mbritten(at)cybernet-usa(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "'Peter Eisentraut'" <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | RE: boolean isn't boolean? |
| Date: | 2000-06-23 14:39:04 |
| Message-ID: | ABFF67479EC9D111AFA30060B01AACDA03ADF6A7@mail |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
normaly i wouldn't be this picky but......
language-lawyer version.. you used the wrong version of the lang, the docs
say it complies to SQL3, which has completely different wording than SQL99
-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Eisentraut [mailto:peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net]
Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2000 11:17 AM
To: Marc Britten
Cc: pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [GENERAL] boolean isn't boolean?
Marc Britten writes:
> why does a boolean value return a t or an f?
The language-lawyer version:
ISO/IEC 9075-5:1999 ("SQL99") 17.2 GR6
"If [the result of the query expression] is not empty, then [it] is
returned. The method of returning [it] is implementation-defined."
Then that's how this implementation defines it. :-)
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | felix | 2000-06-23 14:47:26 | Re: PostgreSQL General Digest V1 #266 |
| Previous Message | Vassili A Akimov | 2000-06-23 14:27:18 | Need to improve performance |