Re: [PATCHES] binary operators on integers - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [PATCHES] binary operators on integers
Date
Msg-id 8142.980289787@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [PATCHES] binary operators on integers  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
I wrote:
> Given the infrequency of use of postfix operators compared to prefix,
> I am inclined to think that we should change the grammar to make the
> latter easier to use at the expense of the former.  On the other hand,
> it seems there's a pretty large risk of backwards-incompatibility here.
> Comments?

I backed away from part of the proposed patch --- changing the
precedence of all the prefix-operator productions to UMINUS would
probably break people's queries.  But I've applied the part that
changes the behavior of a_expr Op Op a_expr.  This will now be
parsed as an infix operator followed by a prefix operator.

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Mikheev, Vadim"
Date:
Subject: RE: Does Oracle store values in indices?
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: Does Oracle store values in indices?