Re: Boolean operators without commutators vs. ALL/ANY - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Eisentraut
Subject Re: Boolean operators without commutators vs. ALL/ANY
Date
Msg-id 1308199157.30501.1.camel@vanquo.pezone.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Boolean operators without commutators vs. ALL/ANY  (Florian Pflug <fgp@phlo.org>)
Responses Re: Boolean operators without commutators vs. ALL/ANY
List pgsql-hackers
On tis, 2011-06-14 at 15:38 +0200, Florian Pflug wrote:
> BTW, there's actually precedent for a commutator of "~", namely
> "@". Some of the geometric types (polygon, box, circle, point,
> path) use "~" as a commutator for "@" (which stands for "contains"). 

I wouldn't have a problem with naming the reverse operator "@".



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: Boolean operators without commutators vs. ALL/ANY
Next
From: Peter Eisentraut
Date:
Subject: Re: [WIP] Support for "ANY/ALL(array) op scalar" (Was: Re: Boolean operators without commutators vs. ALL/ANY)