On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 7:13 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >> I agree that redefining the lexer behavior is a can of worms. What I >> don't understand is why f(2+2) can't call f(smallint) when that's the >> only extant f. It seems to me that we could do that without breaking >> anything that works today: if you look for candidates and don't find >> any, try again, allowing assignment casts the second time. > > Yeah, possibly. Where would you fit that in the existing sequence of > tests? > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/static/typeconv-func.html
I think: If step 4a would result in discarding all candidates, then instead discard candidate functions for which the input types do not match and cannot be converted -- using an ASSIGNMENT conversion -- to match. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
