| From: | Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, alvherre <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: functional call named notation clashes with SQL feature |
| Date: | 2010-05-27 07:51:35 |
| Message-ID: | 4BFE2487.8020207@enterprisedb.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 27/05/10 10:49, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On tor, 2010-05-27 at 04:06 +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>> On 27/05/10 03:57, Robert Haas wrote:
>>> Being compatible with the SQL
>>> standard and with Oracle is not to be taken lightly.
>>
>> I seem to be alone believing that the SQL standard doesn't say anything
>> about named function parameters. Can someone point me to the relevant
>> section of the standard?
>
> It will be in SQL:2011.
Does it mandate => ?
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Takahiro Itagaki | 2010-05-27 07:59:49 | pgsql: Mark PG_MODULE_MAGIC and PG_FUNCTION_INFO_V1 with PGDLLEXPORT |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2010-05-27 07:49:35 | Re: functional call named notation clashes with SQL feature |