Re: Range Types - typo + NULL string constructor - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Jeff Davis
Subject Re: Range Types - typo + NULL string constructor
Date
Msg-id 1318350602.1724.173.camel@jdavis
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Range Types - typo + NULL string constructor  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Range Types - typo + NULL string constructor  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, 2011-10-11 at 12:09 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> The cure seems worse than the disease.  What is so bad about '[]'?

OK, so we stick with the 3-argument form. Do we have a default for the
third argument, or do we scrap it to avoid confusion?

There were some fairly strong objections to using '[]' as the default or
having the default vary between types. So, the only real option
remaining, if we do have a default, is '[)'.

Regards,Jeff Davis




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: Range Types - typo + NULL string constructor
Next
From: Jeff Davis
Date:
Subject: Re: Range Types - typo + NULL string constructor