Re: Poll: are people okay with function/operator table redesign? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: Poll: are people okay with function/operator table redesign?
Date
Msg-id 6099.1587164691@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Poll: are people okay with function/operator table redesign?  ("David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: Poll: are people okay with function/operator table redesign?  ("David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
"David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com> writes:
> I feel like writing them as:
> + (date, integer) -> date
> makes more sense as they are mainly sorted on the operator symbol as
> opposed to the left operand.

Hmm ... we do use that syntax in some fairly-obscure places like
ALTER OPERATOR, but I'm afraid that novice users would just be
completely befuddled.  Maybe the examples would be enough to clarify,
but I'm not convinced.  Especially not for unary operators, where
ALTER OPERATOR would have us write "- (NONE, integer)".

            regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "David G. Johnston"
Date:
Subject: Re: Poll: are people okay with function/operator table redesign?
Next
From: "David G. Johnston"
Date:
Subject: Re: Poll: are people okay with function/operator table redesign?