From: | Sean Chittenden <sean(at)chittenden(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Jon Jensen <jon(at)endpoint(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: massive quotes? |
Date: | 2003-09-12 05:30:54 |
Message-ID: | 20030912053054.GA95961@perrin.nxad.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> >> The $$FOO proposal I put forward earlier was consciously modeled on
> >> here-documents.
>
> > Couldn't we allow << at the beginning of the line to mean 'here' document?
>
> No; you could easily be breaking existing queries, for example
Let me jump in for half a second here (no pun intended), but what
about the use of back quotes? ` `? Use a very limited escaping policy
of \` => ` and \\ => \ . Back quotes aren't used in any SQL or
PL/PgSQL that I'm aware of. I know ruby, perl, and sh make use of
back ticks, but for all intents and purposes, pl/perl shouldn't use
back ticks, and if it is, for performance reasons a DBA shouldn't.
Use of open() or system() should be encouraged as it is possible to
avoid fork()/exec()'ing a shell, nevermind that ``'s aren't the wisest
inclusions for DBAs. If ``'s are needed in the pl language, they can
be nominally included with a \`\`, but given their relative rareness
compared to ' or ", I'd think the addition of ` would be welcome and
much less cumbersome/easier to remember than other options that have
popped up in this thread.
$0.02
-sc
--
Sean Chittenden
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai | 2003-09-12 05:33:37 | Re: constraint modification on todo list |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2003-09-12 04:59:22 | Re: [HACKERS] Reorganization of spinlock defines |