Re: VARIANT / ANYTYPE datatype

Darren Duncan wrote:
> To follow-up, an additional feature that would be useful and resembles union 
> types is the variant where you could declare a union type first and then 
> separately other types could declare they are a member of the union.  I'm 
> talking about loosely what mixins or type-roles or interfaces etc are in other 
> languages.  The most trivial example would be declaring an ENUM-alike first and 
> then separately declaring the component values where the latter declare they are 
> part of the ENUM, and this could make it easier to add or change ENUM values. 
> But keep in mind that this is a distinct concept from what we're otherwise 
> talking about as being union types. -- Darren Duncan

Should this be a TODO item?

--  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
 + It's impossible for everything to be true. +