On Apr 20, 2011, at 11:37 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> But one might well wonder why we didn't decide on:
>> CREATE TABLE n OF TYPE t;
>> ...rather than the actual syntax:
>> CREATE TABLE n OF t;
>> ...which has brevity to recommend it, but likewise isn't terribly clear.
>> I presume someone will now refer to a standard of some kind....
> SQL:2008 11.3 <table definition>, the bits around <typed table clause>
> to be specific.
Right on schedule...
> The SQL committee's taste in syntax is, uh, not mine. They are
> amazingly long-winded in places and then they go and do something
> like this ...
Not to mention that it won't do to use existing syntax (like function call notation) when you could invent bespoke syntax, ideally involving new keywords.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Peter Eisentraut||Date: 2011-04-21 06:43:31|
|Subject: Re: Formatting Curmudgeons WAS: MMAP Buffers|
|Previous:||From: David E. Wheeler||Date: 2011-04-21 04:00:45|
|Subject: Re: Extension Packaging |