Re: @ versus ~, redux

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Matteo Beccati <php(at)beccati(dot)com>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Oleg Bartunov <oleg(at)sai(dot)msu(dot)su>, Teodor Sigaev <teodor(at)sigaev(dot)ru>
Subject: Re: @ versus ~, redux
Date: 2006-09-04 13:52:08
Message-ID: 23054.1157377928@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Matteo Beccati <php(at)beccati(dot)com> writes:
> Tom Lane ha scritto:
>> OK, so if everyone is leaning to #3, the name game remains to be played.
>> Do we all agree on this:
>>
>> "x @> y" means "x contains y"
>> "x @< y" means "x is contained in y"

> Does this mean that also contrib/ltree operators will likely change for
> consistency?

Oh, I hadn't noticed that ltree spells it "<@" rather than "@<". I'd be
inclined to stick with the ltree precedent.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2006-09-04 13:56:07 Re: @ versus ~, redux
Previous Message Michael Glaesemann 2006-09-04 13:50:58 Re: [PATCHES] possible ecpg vpath build error