"Kevin Grittner" <kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov> wrote: > Well, unless things have changed in recent versions of the standard > and I've missed the change, a series of characters enclosed in > apostrophes is what the standard calls a "character string literal" > and defines it to be be related to character based types such as > varchar. That still seems to be the case in the draft of the 2003 standard I have: <general literal> ::= <character string literal> | <national character string literal> | <Unicode character string literal> | <binary string literal> | <datetime literal> | <interval literal> | <boolean literal> <character string literal> ::= [ <introducer><character set specification> ] <quote> [ <character representation>... ] <quote> [ { <separator> <quote> [ <character representation>... ] <quote> }... ] The ball's in your court to show something in the standard to say that a character string literal is ever *not* to be taken as a character string. -Kevin
-- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs