Doug Chamberlin wrote:

> This syntax is a convenience for lists of integer values since the sequence
> of integers is universally known and does not need to be defined. However,
> the syntax does not extend well to other lists of discrete values because
> they would have to be defined somewhere before the shorthand could be
> correctly evaluated. For example, what would the propoer interpretation of
> IN LIST (1.0,1.5,2.0,2.5,3.0-5.0,5.5,6.0)
> be? We humans might interpret this to include 3.5, 4.0, and 4.5 but I don't
> know how the parser would figure that out.
>

It will be evaluated as IN and BETWEEN.
Any datatype could be used inside the string: dates, integers,
strings... as long as a correct escape character is used.

BTW, the LIST aggregate function currently don't have an escape char as
I suggested, and it's limited to not concatenate certain strings correctly.


Adriano