Re: named parameters in SQL functions

Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> At Tom's suggestion I am looking at allowing use of parameter names in
> SQL functions instead of requiring use of $1 etc. That raises the
> question of how we would disambiguate a parameter name from a column
> name. Essentially, ISTM, we could use some special marker such as @
> (c.f. SQL Server) or : (c.f. ecpg) or else we could have some rule that
> says which name takes precedence. I think I prefer a special marker,
> other things being equal. Is there a standard on this?
>

I like the special marker idea. A '$' would be nice because its already in use
for similar purposes, but I think that would lead to ambiguity with dollar quoting.

Would this be limited to sql functions? I only ask because for non-sql
functions we currently prefix parameter names with an underscore, but a built-in
special marker would be much more desirable.

--
Andrew Chernow
eSilo, LLC
every bit counts
http://www.esilo.com/