BUG #15836: Casting 'of' to boolean type should throw an invalid input syntax
The following bug has been logged on the website:
Bug reference: 15836
Logged by: Yuming Wang
Email address: wgyumg@gmail.com
PostgreSQL version: 12beta1
Operating system: linux
Description:
Converting 'of' to a boolean type should throw an invalid input syntax.
Because we said in the documentation that 'of' is not accepted as an input
to the boolean data type:
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/12/datatype-boolean.html
```
postgres=# select cast('of' as boolean);
bool
------
f
(1 row)
```
On Wed, Jun 5, 2019 at 2:37 PM PG Bug reporting form <noreply@postgresql.org>
wrote:
The following bug has been logged on the website:
Bug reference: 15836
Logged by: Yuming Wang
Email address: wgyumg@gmail.com
PostgreSQL version: 12beta1
Operating system: linux
Description:Converting 'of' to a boolean type should throw an invalid input syntax.
Because we said in the documentation that 'of' is not accepted as an input
to the boolean data type:
https://www.postgresql.org/docs/12/datatype-boolean.html
```
postgres=# select cast('of' as boolean);
bool
------
f
(1 row)
```
At this point raising a syntax error is undesirable, but the documentation
should be modified to match the source code, which does say:
src/utils/adt/bool.c
* Try to interpret value as boolean value. Valid values are: true,
* false, yes, no, on, off, 1, 0; as well as unique prefixes thereof.
The unique prefix part needs to make it to user-facing documentation.
David J.
"David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com> writes:
On Wed, Jun 5, 2019 at 2:37 PM PG Bug reporting form <noreply@postgresql.org>
wrote:Converting 'of' to a boolean type should throw an invalid input syntax.
At this point raising a syntax error is undesirable, but the documentation
should be modified to match the source code, which does say:
src/utils/adt/bool.c
* Try to interpret value as boolean value. Valid values are: true,
* false, yes, no, on, off, 1, 0; as well as unique prefixes thereof.
The unique prefix part needs to make it to user-facing documentation.
Agreed, the docs are misleading here. I pushed something to try to
make it better:
regards, tom lane