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

Re: functional call named notation clashes with SQL feature

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: functional call named notation clashes with SQL feature
Date: 2010-05-31 16:26:08
Message-ID: 4C03E320.1000305@dunslane.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Bruce Momjian wrote:
> MSSQL?  Are you sure?  This is the example posted in this thread:
>
> 	EXEC dbo.GetItemPrice @ItemCode = 'GXKP', @PriceLevel = 5
>
> and it more matches our := syntax than => in its argument ordering.
>   

I think you are seriously confused, or else you are seriously confusing 
me. The => proposal is to have the ordering "param_name => 
passed_value", just as Oracle has, just as MSSQL  has "@param_name = 
passed_value", and just as the := proposal would have "param_name := 
passed_value".

cheers

andrew

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2010-05-31 16:35:32
Subject: Re: functional call named notation clashes with SQL feature
Previous:From: Simon RiggsDate: 2010-05-31 16:24:39
Subject: Re: PG 9.0 release timetable

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