Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> This proposal strikes me as half-baked. Either we need proper and full
> support for variadic functions, or we don't, but I don't think we need
> syntactic sugar like the above (or maybe in this case it's really
> syntactic saccharine).
What would you consider "proper and full support"?
regards, tom lane
In response to
pgsql-patches by date
|Next:||From: Neil Conway||Date: 2008-06-23 18:12:08|
|Subject: Re: A GUC variable to replace PGBE_ACTIVITY_SIZE|
|Previous:||From: Andrew Dunstan||Date: 2008-06-23 16:46:28|
|Subject: Re: variadic function support|