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

Re: Proposal: plpgsql - "for in array" statement

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Proposal: plpgsql - "for in array" statement
Date: 2010-09-28 21:03:27
Message-ID: 28950.1285707807@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
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

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Sergey BurladyanDate: 2010-09-28 21:35:00
Subject: UTF8 regexp and char classes still does not work
Previous:From: David FetterDate: 2010-09-28 21:03:15
Subject: Commitfest: The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly

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