Let me unretract it slightly, taking into account Mike's email too...

How about changing eq (which is new so not breaking backwardsness) to
'==' ?

Then we have == <> >= <= > and <

Rob


>On 7/26/06, Mike Rylander <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> On 7/26/06, Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> > On Wed, 26 Jul 2006, Mike Taylor wrote:
>> > It seems strange to me that equality is 'eq' (a string) but inequality
>> > is a combination of the special characters < and >.
>> > More consistent to me would be == and !=, == and <>, or 'eq' and 'ne'.

>> And I'd personally like to see full consistency along the lines of
>> 'lt', 'le', 'gt' and 'ge'.  Or, perhaps, the addition of those
>> relations to text semantics instead of numeric.
>
>Rob properly schooled me in the locale relation modifier (IRC), so I
>retract this idea entirely. :)