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

Re: [pgsql-general 2011-1-21:] Are there any projects interested in object functionality? (+ rule bases)

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Nick Rudnick <joerg(dot)rudnick(at)t-online(dot)de>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [pgsql-general 2011-1-21:] Are there any projects interested in object functionality? (+ rule bases)
Date: 2011-02-01 15:14:49
Message-ID: AANLkTi=uqknNTXpwP+GVZ3xbFsxsOn88=H2xHMuMOegw@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 10:11 AM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
> The SQL standard has the <method invocation> clause that appears to
> allow:
>
>    ...something.column.method(args)
>
> Good luck finding out how to interpret the dots, but it's specified
> somewhere.

My head just exploded.

> It'd be kind of nice as a syntax and namespacing alternative, actually,
> but figuring out the compatibility problems would be a headache.

No joke.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Greg SmithDate: 2011-02-01 15:49:03
Subject: Re: Spread checkpoint sync
Previous:From: Peter EisentrautDate: 2011-02-01 15:11:16
Subject: Re: [pgsql-general 2011-1-21:] Are there any projects interested in object functionality? (+ rule bases)

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