Re: IN and ANY - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: IN and ANY
Date
Msg-id 4196.1078264447@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: IN and ANY  (Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>)
Responses Re: IN and ANY
List pgsql-hackers
Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com> writes:
> But then we need to decide, what happens when we see:
>    argL IN (argR1, argR2, ...)
> and argRn data type is an array of argL data type? Do we check all the 
> argRn elements individually and return true if any of them equal argL? 
> I'd guess so.

This seems like an awfully mistake-prone "feature", even if it's
theoretically not ambiguous.  I think we should leave things as they
are.  We'd not be adding any actual functionality, only some notational
consistency, and that doesn't seem worth the risk of confusion as to
exactly what IN will do.

[ wanders away trying to remember that quote about "foolish consistency" ]
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Joe Conway
Date:
Subject: Re: IN and ANY
Next
From: Joe Conway
Date:
Subject: Re: IN and ANY