| From: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: REVIEW: WIP: plpgsql - foreach in |
| Date: | 2011-01-24 03:54:05 |
| Message-ID: | 20110124035405.GY30352@tamriel.snowman.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
* Robert Haas (robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com) wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 9:49 PM, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> wrote:
> > Why are you using 'FOREACH' here instead of just making it another
> > variation of 'FOR'?
>
> Uh oh. You just reopened the can of worms from hell.
hahahaha. Apparently I missed that discussion; also wasn't linked off
the patch. :/ Guess I'll go poke through the archives... Struck me as
obviously wrong to invent something completely new for this, but..
Thanks,
Stephen
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2011-01-24 04:05:55 | Re: REVIEW: WIP: plpgsql - foreach in |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2011-01-24 03:50:41 | Re: REVIEW: WIP: plpgsql - foreach in |