Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> 2010/9/28 Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>:
>> Sure it can: it could be a parenthesized top-level query. In fact,
>> that's what plpgsql will assume if you feed it that syntax today.
> no - there are not any legal construct FOR r IN (..)
You are simply wrong, sir, and I suggest that you go read the SQL
standard until you realize that. Consider for example
for r in (SELECT ... FROM a UNION SELECT ... FROM b) INTERSECT (SELECT ... FROM c) LOOP ...
The parentheses here are not merely legal, they are *necessary*, else
the semantics of the UNION/INTERSECT operations change.
regards, tom lane
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Sergey Burladyan||Date: 2010-09-28 21:35:00|
|Subject: UTF8 regexp and char classes still does not work|
|Previous:||From: David Fetter||Date: 2010-09-28 21:03:15|
|Subject: Commitfest: The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly|