Sam Mason <s...@samason.me.uk> wrote: > I'd always thought '2001-01-01' was a valid date literal, seems the > standard has required it to be prefixed by DATE at least back to > SQL92. Yep. I don't know if it would be remotely feasible, but the implementation which seems like it would be "standard-safe" but still give reasonable concessions to those wanting to skip the extra keystrokes of declaring the type of literals which are not character based would be to go with the suggestion of having a character string literal type, and change the semantics such that if there is a valid interpretation of the statement with the character string literal taken as text, it should be used; if not, resolve by current "unknown" rules. Probably not feasible, but it seems likely it would make everyone reasonably happy if it could be done. That leaves the issue of NULL being forced to type text in the absence of any type info in CASE, COALESCE, and NULLIF. If there were a way to say that these could return unknown type, that would be solved. That doesn't seem as though it would be likely to be massively difficult, although I could be wrong about that. -Kevin
-- Sent via pgsql-bugs mailing list (pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-bugs
