Re: Re: proposal - using names as primary names of plpgsql function parameters instead $ based names

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Jeevan Chalke <jeevan(dot)chalke(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Re: proposal - using names as primary names of plpgsql function parameters instead $ based names
Date: 2017-09-11 20:28:01
Message-ID: 2214.1505161681@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Jeevan Chalke <jeevan(dot)chalke(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
[ psql-named-arguments-03-jeevan.patch ]

Pushed with minor simplification of the test case.

I'm not quite as convinced as Pavel that this is an improvement ---
it will make error messages inconsistent between named and unnamed
arguments. Still, I follow the point that when there are a lot of
arguments, $n is pretty unhelpful. We can always revert this if
we get complaints.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2017-09-11 20:57:15 Re: Coverage improvements of src/bin/pg_basebackup and pg_receivewal --endpos
Previous Message Peter Eisentraut 2017-09-11 19:33:42 Re: More flexible LDAP auth search filters?