Michael Glaesemann <grzm@seespotcode.net> writes:
> Assuming the meaning of contains and is contained in is inclusive
> (rather than strict), then we'd have
> a <<= b : a contains b
> a =>> b : a is contained by b
I don't think we can consider that, because we already have << and >>
operators meaning "is left of", "is right of" for (some of) the affected
datatypes. We'd have to start renaming those too, and that very rapidly
turns into a mess.
regards, tom lane