When we shoehorned "x op ANY (array)" into the SQL syntax, we created a
fundamental ambiguity as to the proper treatment of a sub-SELECT on the
righthand side: perhaps what's meant is to compare x against each row of
the sub-SELECT's result, or perhaps the sub-SELECT is meant as a scalar
sub-SELECT that delivers a single array value whose members should be
compared against x.  The grammar resolves it as the former case whenever
the RHS is a select_with_parens, making the latter case hard to reach ---
but you can get at it, with tricks such as attaching a no-op cast to the
sub-SELECT.  Parse analysis would throw away the no-op cast, leaving a
parsetree with an EXPR_SUBLINK SubLink directly under a ScalarArrayOpExpr.
ruleutils.c was not clued in on this fine point, and would naively emit
"x op ANY ((SELECT ...))", which would be parsed as the first alternative,
typically leading to errors like "operator does not exist: text = text[]"
during dump/reload of a view or rule containing such a construct.  To fix,
emit a no-op cast when dumping such a parsetree.  This might well be
exactly what the user wrote to get the construct accepted in the first
place; and even if she got there with some other dodge, it is a valid
representation of the parsetree.

Per report from Karl Czajkowski.  He mentioned only a case involving
RLS policies, but actually the problem is very old, so back-patch to
all supported branches.

Report: <20160421001832.GB7976@moraine.isi.edu>