Re: @ versus ~, redux

Tom Lane wrote:

> I can see various things that we might consider doing:
> 
> 1. Just flip the names of the two operators added by the GIN patch.
> 
> 2. #1 plus flip the names of the various contrib operators that are
>    out of sync (Michael Fuhr points out that contrib/intarray is out
>    of step too ... are there others?).
> 
> 3. Leave the existing op names as-is in core and contrib, but consider
>    them deprecated and add new ops with consistently-chosen names.
>    (The new ops introduced by GIN should only exist with the new names.)
> 
> #1 isn't doing anything towards solving the underlying problem.
> #2 has got obvious backwards-compatibility issues for contrib users.
> #3 may or may not be technically feasible (I'm not sure if we can
> support multiple operators occupying the same slot in an opclass),
> besides which choosing the names to use could degenerate to a flamewar.

I suggest: #4 Standardize on new names and completely drop old naming 
scheme, both in core and in contrib.

#2 is much too dangerous, because people may not recognize that their 
code needs updating.  #3 introduces new code in core that has no other 
legitimate purpose (or does someone see a reason why this is generally 
useful?)

#4 would force people to notice that their code needs updating, which is 
far safer than hoping people will notice.

mark