Re: proposal for 8.4: PL/pgSQL - statement CASE

From: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: "Pavel Stehule" <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, "Josh Berkus" <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: proposal for 8.4: PL/pgSQL - statement CASE
Date: 2008-01-17 16:54:43
Message-ID: 20080117085443.6e5fe53d@commandprompt.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 17:43:45 +0100
"Pavel Stehule" <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> we develop PostgreSQL, but why create own syntax for all? Why? Only so
> we develop PostgreSQL? We have different implementation and different
> limit, but why create different syntax, I don't understand. It's like
> Microsoft. Lot of things are little bit incompatible.

O.k. hold on guys. I really don't care what you do with plpgsql. I
don't use it unless I absolutely have to anyway. All I was doing was
saying that:

A. I could give flying donkey butt about being the Oracle-Compatible
community.

B. That "SWITCH" may be an alternate syntax because 15 years ago when I
took a CS class and I did one chapter of C they had a SWITCH statement
that resembles CASE.

Please continue on.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

- --
The PostgreSQL Company: Since 1997, http://www.commandprompt.com/
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
SELECT 'Training', 'Consulting' FROM vendor WHERE name = 'CMD'

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFHj4hVATb/zqfZUUQRAhbpAJ9+qwBAHqxwSCCeVzbRjKBiFTpVhQCdEX+j
vrXiUgBeLQoBKx3s68214qw=
=kc7c
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Pavel Stehule 2008-01-17 17:00:21 Re: proposal for 8.4: PL/pgSQL - statement CASE
Previous Message Kevin Grittner 2008-01-17 16:44:16 Re: OUTER JOIN performance regression remains in 8.3beta4