Randall Smith wrote: > Thanks Tom. I understand your points and I gather that the cost of > making the change (even as an option) outweighs the benefits of SQL > conformance for the developers. Though I'm still of the same opinion. > > I'll give the pghackers forum a visit and since I'm already on the > subject here, I'll make a direct comparison of the situation. > Microsoft's Internet Explorer web browser is known to have poor support > for the CSS standard, but refuses to fix it saying that it's too > difficult and would break existing websites. Many developers, myself > included, prefer to code to the standard and have the html/css render > correctly in all browsers. In the long run, it's better to do it right > even if that means breaking things today. If the standard is good (there > are poor standards), there's no reason to not use the standard.
If we thought uppercase was a _better_ way to do things, we might some day make the switch, but we don't, so the switch will probably never happen. -- Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
