On Tue, 2 Apr 2002, Tom Lane wrote: > Stephan Szabo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Are the array iterator functions supposed to act sort of like > > =ANY/=ALL except across an array instead of a subselect? > > Seems like a reasonable definition. > > > If so, > > isStrict probably isn't right, since for an empty subselect the return > > value does not depend on the element being searched for. > > Hm ... isn't it NULL anyway, if the left side is NULL? > > But if you're right, then the correct fix involves updating the > functions to V1 calling conventions, so that they can make a correct > test for NULL inputs (rather than bogusly checking for zero value).
I think the empty case is special, due to the rules on <quantified comparison predicate>s. It looks like no comparison predicates need to be run. I think the applicable parts of 8.7 are General Rule 2a If T is empty or if the implied <comparison predicate> is true for every row RT in T, then "R <comp op> <all> T" is true. General Rule 2d If T is empty or if the implied <comparison predicate> is false for every row RT in T, then "R <comp op> <some> T" is false. ---------------------------(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
