| From: | <geek+(at)cmu(dot)edu> |
|---|---|
| To: | hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] Data type removal |
| Date: | 1998-03-24 16:37:00 |
| Message-ID: | emacs-smtp-20243-13591-57644-936428@export.andrew.cmu.edu |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Speaking of data type removal, I was wondering if there were a better
way to handle arrays of types. From looking in the catalog, it
appears that for each type, there is also declared a similar type,
which is the array version. It seems that arrays should be considered
more flags on a field, than a field type in themselves. Does this
make sense to anybody else?
- --
=====================================================================
| JAVA must have been developed in the wilds of West Virginia. |
| After all, why else would it support only single inheritance?? |
=====================================================================
| Finger geek(at)andrew(dot)cmu(dot)edu for my public key. |
=====================================================================
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
iQBVAwUBNRfhLIdzVnzma+gdAQGUvwH8CWMmMo633do81jgZd+pPPJPW481nfwB9
awec8H9PjZ3QsShK4cSIJmC9Yg+IMBp3E+goHYssAO4X42Nf15+0EA==
=8YSU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | The Hermit Hacker | 1998-03-24 16:38:54 | Re: [HACKERS] char types gone. |
| Previous Message | Darren King | 1998-03-24 16:11:02 | Re: [HACKERS] Data type removal |