From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <kostja.osipov@gmail.com>
Received: from mail-lf1-f43.google.com (mail-lf1-f43.google.com
 [209.85.167.43])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by dev.tarantool.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BB8BD4696C3
 for <tarantool-discussions@dev.tarantool.org>;
 Thu, 30 Apr 2020 17:28:23 +0300 (MSK)
Received: by mail-lf1-f43.google.com with SMTP id z22so1221990lfd.0
 for <tarantool-discussions@dev.tarantool.org>;
 Thu, 30 Apr 2020 07:28:23 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2020 17:28:21 +0300
From: Konstantin Osipov <kostja.osipov@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20200430142821.GF6499@atlas>
References: <20200213142534.GA26443@tarantool.org>
 <36e21524-35d7-9f54-5953-32863df95709@tarantool.org>
 <20200430123500.GA6499@atlas>
 <8c71af0d-3693-82d5-4b15-f7b7fe38062c@tarantool.org>
 <20200430130947.GC6499@atlas>
 <2a788af3-6efe-bce8-1509-f7e08639b36f@tarantool.org>
 <20200430140414.GD6499@atlas>
 <a2d05765-7869-440b-2548-17e4bc9cc465@ocelot.ca>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <a2d05765-7869-440b-2548-17e4bc9cc465@ocelot.ca>
Subject: Re: [Tarantool-discussions] Implicit cast for ASSIGNMENT
List-Id: Tarantool development process
 <tarantool-discussions.dev.tarantool.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.tarantool.org/mailman/options/tarantool-discussions>, 
 <mailto:tarantool-discussions-request@dev.tarantool.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.tarantool.org/pipermail/tarantool-discussions/>
List-Post: <mailto:tarantool-discussions@dev.tarantool.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tarantool-discussions-request@dev.tarantool.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.tarantool.org/mailman/listinfo/tarantool-discussions>, 
 <mailto:tarantool-discussions-request@dev.tarantool.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Peter Gulutzan <pgulutzan@ocelot.ca>
Cc: tarantool-discussions@dev.tarantool.org

* Peter Gulutzan <pgulutzan@ocelot.ca> [20/04/30 17:16]:
> I of course think that it should work,
> but K. Yukhin decided it should not work.
> 
> With regard to the earlier questions
> 
> Unfortunately assigning 1.1 to an INTEGER fails.
> "Implicit casting among the numeric data types"
> is a mandatory feature of standard SQL,
> My opinion was that implicit cast should be legal
> https://github.com/tarantool/tarantool/issues/4216
> However, K. Yukhin closed that issue.
> 
> I also believed that typeof(1.0) should be DECIMAL.
> https://github.com/tarantool/tarantool/issues/4415
> But currently typeof(1.0) is DOUBLE.

OK, I didn't know it's ANSI. I withdraw my previous remarks and
side with Peter. Please do as he says about implicit casts of
numeric types.


-- 
Konstantin Osipov, Moscow, Russia