Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum wrote:
> Andrew: your workaround was to create a domain which would use
> 0/1 ... this idea will not behave like a boolean, because it does not
> accept 'true'/'false'.
>
> My replacement boolean type does accept all this input values and does
> emit 0/1 instead of 'f'/'t'. But since i have to create all the casts,
> operators and classes (like for boolean) again for my data type, i asked
> if someone know a more elegant way ... if not, i will use my data type.
>
> You can see the code here:
>
> http://andreas.scherbaum.la/writings/boolean.sql
>
> This are some hundred lines of SQL which are almost doubled from the
> boolean type. So maybe there's a way to avoid all this, but i haven't
> found one.
>
>
>
>
Looks to me like this is the way to meet you requirements.
cheers
andrew
