On Monday 15 December 2008 15:43:00 Tom Lane wrote: > Peter Eisentraut <pete...@gmx.net> writes: > > Rushabh Lathia wrote: > >> I think this should not return error as the input args here is > >> timestamp... inputs? > > > > In theory yes, but it's currently not that smart. > > This is truly horrid. Was that patch *really* ready to commit? > I noticed some comments added to polymorphism.sql that certainly > look like there's still a lot of half-bakedness in it.
There is that one case where a call that could be allowed is overly-cautiously rejected. That only happens if you have a mix of overloading and default parameters. It's not really half-baked in the sense that it is not digestible; it's just not the greatest cake yet. It's improvement-compatible. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
