> Unfortunately for you, they are not different types. If the OCaml
> binding thinks they are, it's the binding's problem; especially since
> the binding seems to be using a completely lame method of trying to tell
> the difference.
Hi,
In OCaml and in other languages with strong type systems, "int4 never NULL"
and "int4 possibly NULL" are definitely different types. I think the source
of the problem here is that SQL has a different philosophy, one where type
constraints are not seen as creating new types.
But anyway if you think that checking pg_attribute is a lame method of
obtaining type information, what do you suggest should be done instead?
What would you do if it were you creating the bindings?
Thanks,
C.S.
____________________________________________________________________________________
Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect. Join Yahoo!'s user panel and lay it on us. http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_panel_invite.asp?a=7
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
