Re: proposal sql: labeled function params

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Decibel! <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: proposal sql: labeled function params
Date: 2008-08-17 15:08:34
Message-ID: 20151.1218985714@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> writes:
> Actually the most "natural" syntax to me is just f(name=value) similar
> to how UPDATE does it. It has the added benefit of _not_ forcing us to
> make a operator reserved (AFAIK "=" can't be used to define new ops)

*What* are you thinking?

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Hans-Jürgen Schönig 2008-08-17 15:15:44 Re: Mini improvement: statement_cost_limit
Previous Message Hannu Krosing 2008-08-17 11:51:39 Re: proposal sql: labeled function params