On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 10:36 AM Vik Fearing <vik@postgresfriends.org> wrote:
> So if I make a complex UDT where a NOT operator makes a lot of sense[*],
> why wouldn't I be allowed to make a prefix operator ! for it? All for
> what? That one person in the corner over there who doesn't want to
> rewrite their query to use factorial() instead?
>
> I'm -1 on keeping ! around as a hard-coded postfix operator.
Fair enough. I think you may be in the majority on that one, too. I
just wanted to raise the issue, and we'll see if anyone else agrees.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
