Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 1:24 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> in particular, s/may/will/ and avoid passive voice in the second sentence.
> Avoiding the passive voice is a good idea, and I like your suggested
> phrasing. I'm reluctant to say what we "will" do in a future release
> because we don't always do what we claim we'll do.
True.
> Still, I haven't heard too many arguments against disallowing => as an
> operator, so perhaps it's safe to bank on it actually happening in
> this case?
AFAICS, the only way we won't do it is if the SQL committee reverses
field on the syntax they're using. I'm not going to promise that it
will change in 9.1 --- we might wait longer --- but once => is official
standard syntax the pressure to do it will be high.
regards, tom lane
