Re: Casts question
От | Shachar Shemesh |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Casts question |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 40D5EF3D.6040802@shemesh.biz обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Casts question (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Casts question
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote: >Shachar Shemesh <psql@shemesh.biz> writes: > > >>I have defined a datatype called "varcharci", shamelessly yanking the >>input, output, recv and send functions from varchar. This means (as far >>as I understand things) that this type is binary compatible with varchar. >> >> > >Use text, not varchar. > > > >>Why is that? Being as it is that no operator = is defined for varcharci, >>and that the cast from varchar to varcharci is "as assignment" anyways, >>shouldn't postgres be able to do the cast implicitly? >> >> > >Yes, it can cast to varchar, but that doesn't help because there are no >varchar operators ;-). To resolve the operator, it has to promote both >sides to text, and you didn't offer a cast to text. > > regards, tom lane > > > I don't get it. The cast from varchar to text is using a "no function" cast - i.e. - they are binary compatible. And yet, there are two seperate functions for receiving from text and from binary representation. Why not use the same function? Shachar -- Shachar Shemesh Lingnu Open Source Consulting ltd. http://www.lingnu.com/
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: