Re: functional call named notation clashes with SQL feature

On tor, 2010-05-27 at 10:51 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> On 27/05/10 10:49, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > On tor, 2010-05-27 at 04:06 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> >> On 27/05/10 03:57, Robert Haas wrote:
> >>> Being compatible with the SQL
> >>> standard and with Oracle is not to be taken lightly.
> >>
> >> I seem to be alone believing that the SQL standard doesn't say anything
> >> about named function parameters. Can someone point me to the relevant
> >> section of the standard?
> >
> > It will be in SQL:2011.
>
> Does it mandate => ?

<routine invocation> ::= <routine name> <SQL argument list>

<routine name> ::= [ <schema name> <period> ] <qualified identifier>

<SQL argument list> ::= <left paren> [ <SQL argument> [ { <comma> <SQL
argument> }... ] ] <right paren>

<SQL argument> ::= <value expression>
| <generalized expression>
| <target specification>
| <contextually typed value specification>
| <named argument specification>

<generalized expression> ::= <value expression> AS <path-resolved
user-defined type name>

<named argument specification> ::= <SQL parameter name> <named argument
assignment token> <named argument SQL argument>

<named argument SQL argument> ::= <value expression>
| <target specification>
| <contextually typed value specification>

<named argument assignment token> ::=
=>