Re: Precedence of standard comparison operators

Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> On February 26, 2015 10:29:18 PM CET, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
>> My suggestion was to treat this like the standard_conforming_string
>> change. That is, warn for many years before changing.

> I don't think scs is a good example to follow.

Yeah. For one thing, there wouldn't be any way to suppress the warning
other than to parenthesize your code, which I would find problematic
because it would penalize standard-conforming queries. I'd prefer an
arrangement whereby once you fix your code to be standard-conforming,
you're done.

A possible point of compromise would be to leave the warning turned on
by default, at least until we get a better sense of how this would
play out in the real world. I continue to suspect that we're making
a mountain out of, if not a molehill, at least a hillock. I think most
sane people would have parenthesized their queries to start with rather
than go look up whether IS DISTINCT FROM binds tighter than <= ...

regards, tom lane