Re: Cannot declare record members NOT NULL
От | Cultural Sublimation |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Cannot declare record members NOT NULL |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 201445.51014.qm@web63413.mail.re1.yahoo.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Cannot declare record members NOT NULL (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Cannot declare record members NOT NULL
Re: Cannot declare record members NOT NULL |
Список | pgsql-general |
> Unfortunately for you, they are not different types. If the OCaml > binding thinks they are, it's the binding's problem; especially since > the binding seems to be using a completely lame method of trying to tell > the difference. Hi, In OCaml and in other languages with strong type systems, "int4 never NULL" and "int4 possibly NULL" are definitely different types. I think the source of the problem here is that SQL has a different philosophy, one where type constraints are not seen as creating new types. But anyway if you think that checking pg_attribute is a lame method of obtaining type information, what do you suggest should be done instead? What would you do if it were you creating the bindings? Thanks, C.S. ____________________________________________________________________________________ Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect. Join Yahoo!'s user panel and lay it on us. http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_panel_invite.asp?a=7
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: