Andrew Gierth <andrew@tao11.riddles.org.uk> writes:
> Yeah, but the main visible effect of that has been a stream of "you have
> to use NOT (x IS NULL) rather than (x IS NOT NULL)" responses to people
> having trouble with this.
I don't offhand recall any such complaints on pgsql-bugs. Maybe there
have been some on IRC.
> Is there a single reported case where anyone has actually needed the
> spec's version of (x IS NOT NULL) for a composite type?
By definition, we get no "reports" for a case where something works
as someone expects. So you're demanding proof that cannot exist.
regards, tom lane
