Re: functional call named notation clashes with SQL feature

On 27/05/10 10:16, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> 2010/5/27 Heikki Linnakangas<heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>:
>> On 27/05/10 09:50, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>>>
>>> 2010/5/27 Heikki Linnakangas<heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>:
>>>>
>>>> AFAIU, the standard doesn't say anything about named parameters. Oracle
>>>> uses
>>>> =>, but as you said, that's ambiguous with the => operator.
>>>>
>>>> +1 for FOR.
>>>
>>> I don't see any advantage of "FOR".
>>
>> Any advantage over AS? It doesn't clash with the "foo AS bar" syntax that
>> the standard is using for something completely different, as Peter pointed
>> out in the original post.
>
> No, standard knows "AS" in different context. In param list standard
> doesn't use keyword "AS".

As Peter pointed out in the original post, according to the standard
"function(foo AS bar)" means something else than what we have now.
Please re-read the original post.

>>> We can change ir to support new standard or don't change it.
>>
>> What new standard?
>
> ANSI SQL 2011

Oh, does that have something to say about named parameters? Is the draft
publicly available somewhere?

--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com