On Tue, Sep 15, 2020 at 3:48 PM Alexander Korotkov <aekorot...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi! > > I've skimmed through the thread and checked the patchset. Everything > looks good, except one paragraph, which doesn't look completely clear. > > + <para> > + This emulates the functionality provided by > + <xref linkend="sql-createtype"/> but sets the created object's > + <glossterm linkend="glossary-type-definition">type > definition</glossterm> > + to domain. > + </para> > > As I get it states that CREATE DOMAIN somehow "emulates" CREATE TYPE. > Could you please, rephrase it? It looks confusing to me yet. > > I'll look at it. My main point here is that writing "CREATE TYPE typename AS DOMAIN" would be expected, with the appropriate sub-specification, similar to "CREATE TYPE typename AS RANGE". While the syntax wasn't rolled up into "CREATE TYPE" proper "CREATE DOMAIN" effectively does the same thing - creates a type of domain (just ask CREATE TYPE AS RANGE creates a type of range). I'm calling "a type of something" the type's "type domain". CREATE DOMAIN emulates the non-existent "CREATE TYPE typename AS DOMAIN" command. David J.
