Re: functional call named notation clashes with SQL feature

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
Cc: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: functional call named notation clashes with SQL feature
Date: 2010-05-31 16:26:08
Message-ID: 4C03E320.1000305@dunslane.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Bruce Momjian wrote:
> MSSQL? Are you sure? This is the example posted in this thread:
>
> EXEC dbo.GetItemPrice @ItemCode = 'GXKP', @PriceLevel = 5
>
> and it more matches our := syntax than => in its argument ordering.
>

I think you are seriously confused, or else you are seriously confusing
me. The => proposal is to have the ordering "param_name =>
passed_value", just as Oracle has, just as MSSQL has "@param_name =
passed_value", and just as the := proposal would have "param_name :=
passed_value".

cheers

andrew

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2010-05-31 16:35:32 Re: functional call named notation clashes with SQL feature
Previous Message Simon Riggs 2010-05-31 16:24:39 Re: PG 9.0 release timetable