Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: functional call named notation clashes with SQL feature

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: functional call named notation clashes with SQL feature
Date: 2010-05-31 15:22:08
Message-ID: 201005311522.o4VFM8Z01718@momjian.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> So as far as I can tell, no one is opposed to replacing "expr AS name"
> >> with "name := expr" in the named-parameter syntax.  Obviously we had
> >> better get this done before beta2.  Is anyone actually working on the
> >> code/docs changes?  If not, I'll pick it up.
> 
> > If we eventually are going to want to support the ANSI standard "=>"
> > syntax, I am thinking we should just do it now.  The larger question is
> > what justification do we have of not supporting "=>".
> 
> Not breaking hstore, as well as any third-party modules that might be
> using that operator name.  Did you not absorb any of the discussion
> so far?

Yes, but if we are going to have to honor "=>" eventually, shouldn't we
just do it now?  Supporting := and => seems confusing.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2010-05-31 15:24:44
Subject: Re: functional call named notation clashes with SQL feature
Previous:From: Sharmila JothirajahDate: 2010-05-31 15:19:15
Subject: Re: Index only scans

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group