Tom Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Regarding the type system understanding ANYENUM, most of the type system
> treats ANYENUM identically to ANYELEMENT, the only parts that really
> need to understand it are the bits that try to tie down concrete types.
The reason I'm feeling annoyed with ANYfoo stuff today is that yesterday
I had to put a special hack for ANYARRAY into the ri_triggers code,
which you'd think would have no concern with it. But perhaps this is
just an indication that we need to refactor the code in parse_coerce.c.
(The problem in ri_triggers is that it uses find_coercion_pathway()
which does not concern itself with ANYfoo types.)
Anyway, objection withdrawn --- I just thought it seemed a good idea to
question whether we were adding a frammish we didn't really need.
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
