Tom Lane wrote:
Shachar Shemesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I have defined a datatype called "varcharci", shamelessly yanking the
input, output, recv and send functions from varchar. This means (as far
as I understand things) that this type is binary compatible with varchar.
Use text, not varchar.
Why is that? Being as it is that no operator = is defined for varcharci,
and that the cast from varchar to varcharci is "as assignment" anyways,
shouldn't postgres be able to do the cast implicitly?
Yes, it can cast to varchar, but that doesn't help because there are no
varchar operators ;-). To resolve the operator, it has to promote both
sides to text, and you didn't offer a cast to text.
regards, tom lane
I don't get it. The cast from varchar to text is using a "no function"
cast - i.e. - they are binary compatible. And yet, there are two
seperate functions for receiving from text and from binary
representation. Why not use the same function?
Shachar
--
Shachar Shemesh
Lingnu Open Source Consulting ltd.
http://www.lingnu.com/
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
