> it means, so we must not implement any new operator? If the operator were called [EMAIL PROTECTED], I think you could make a good argument that no one else is likely using that for anything.
Surely the same cannot be said of => Of course, [EMAIL PROTECTED] is not a very convenient name for an operator, but that's exactly the point: there are only a limited number of good, short names for operators, and => must be near the top of that list. ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
