On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 09:01:45AM +0200, Florian Pflug wrote:
> Hm, that's less bulky but more kludgy, I'd say. But wait a minute...
>
> If ANY and ALL are reserved anyway, should it be possible to
> make "(ANY(..) <op> <expr>)" and "(ALL(...) <op> <expr>)"
> work grammar-wise? (Note the enclosing parens)
This would be a very, very useful feature. :)
Cheers,
David.
--
David Fetter <david@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david.fetter@gmail.com
iCal: webcal://www.tripit.com/feed/ical/people/david74/tripit.ics
Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
