Thomas Lockhart writes:
> > So, anyone have any ideas what NaN would be useful for? Especially given
> > we have NULL available, which most (non DB) numeric applications don't.
>
> Hmm. With Tom Lane's new fmgr interface, you *can* return NULL if you
> spot a NaN result. Maybe that is the best way to go about it; we'll
> stipulate that NaN and NULL are equivalent. And we'll further stipulate
> that if you are messing with NaN then you deserve what you get ;)
I beg to differ, this behaviour would not be correct. Instead, this should
happen:
NULL < NULL => NULL
NULL < 1.0 => NULL
NULL < Nan => NULL
1.0 < NULL => NULL
1.0 < NaN => false
NaN < NULL => NULL
NaN < 1.0 => false
Then all the NaN's sort either all first or all last before or after the
NULLs.
--
Peter Eisentraut Sernanders väg 10:115
peter_e@gmx.net 75262 Uppsala
http://yi.org/peter-e/ Sweden