Re: Handling NULL records in plpgsql
| От | Dave Gudeman |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Handling NULL records in plpgsql |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 7b079fba0810251335v724d9e7ejed63053a42b6c95d@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Handling NULL records in plpgsql ("Robert Haas" <robertmhaas@gmail.com>) |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 11:59 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
I've always thought that IS should be used for this. That is:
x IS y
is equivalent to
x=y OR (x IS NULL AND y IS NULL)
and
x IS NOT y
is equivalent to
x <> y AND (x IS NOT NULL OR y IS NOT NULL)
If you define the IS operator like this then IS NULL is no longer an operator. It is just the IS operator with the NULL literal as the second operand.
> I really think we should have a way of telling if a array/row/record+1. Also, can whatever syntax we introduce by something relatively
> variable is actually set to something, and I'm pretty sure that should be
> unrelated to whether all the elements in it happen to be null.
concise? Code that looks nice when you write "=" does not look as
nice when you write "IS NOT DISTINCT FROM". I'm almost inclined to
suggest using functional notation rather than dreaming up a new "IS
WHATEVER" syntax.
I've always thought that IS should be used for this. That is:
x IS y
is equivalent to
x=y OR (x IS NULL AND y IS NULL)
and
x IS NOT y
is equivalent to
x <> y AND (x IS NOT NULL OR y IS NOT NULL)
If you define the IS operator like this then IS NULL is no longer an operator. It is just the IS operator with the NULL literal as the second operand.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: