Tom Lane wrote:
Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
I am looking at creating a few generic functions builtin for the enum
stuff. These would be tied to each enum type as it is created. However,
they should not really appear in pg_proc initially, as there wouldn't be
any enum types to tie them to anyway. But I want them to have reserved
oids and appear in the list of builtins.
This feels wrong to me. Ways that might work include:
1. Invent a pseudotype 'anyenum' comparable to 'anyarray', and define
the generic functions as taking 'anyenum'.
2. Don't try to define the generic operations as true functions, but
make them special syntactic constructs comparable to ROW() or ARRAY[].
I think I like #1 better, but it's hard to be sure when discussing
it in a vacuum. How about being more specific about what you want
to accomplish?
Yeah, after a bit more thought I came to the conclusion that it wouldn't
fly.
What I want to have is some builtin functions that can be used as the
input/output/cast/etc functions for each enum type. The idea wasn't to
allow users to overload the functions.
I guess we could invent an anyenum pseudotype without actually exposing
it via the grammar.
Will keep thinking ...
cheers
andrew
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 1: 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
