On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 07:48:06PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > "Kevin Grittner" <kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov> writes: > > I realize I'm in a minority on this, but I would also prefer an > > error. I expect things like > > > > SELECT "date" + (INTERVAL '1' YEAR) > > > > to just work. > > Uh, I think you're confused. That certainly works, and I didn't > hear anyone proposing to change it. The issue is about undecorated > literals. If we start throwing errors for those, the fallout will > make the 8.3 implicit-cast changes look like a day at the beach. I > believe that it would also violate the SQL spec in numerous places > --- whether you like it or not, the concept of context-dependent > type resolution is built into the standard.
As far as you can tell, does the standard speak to adding an untyped literal to a time format? The draft standard I have here lists, "Valid operators involving datetimes and intervals" as, Operand 1 Operator Operand 2 Result Type Datetime – Datetime Interval Datetime + or – Interval Datetime Interval + Datetime Datetime Interval + or – Interval Interval Interval * or / Numeric Interval Numeric * Interval Interval It's not crystal clear to me whether any type coercion behavior is mandated here, or which kind, if there is some. Cheers, David. -- David Fetter <da...@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/ Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david.fet...@gmail.com Remember to vote! Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers