Re: WIP: Allow SQL-language functions to reference parameters by parameter name

On 04/07/2011 09:58 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas<robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 5:52 PM, Andrew Dunstan<andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> wrote:
>>> That doesn't mean we should arbitrarily break compatibility with pl/sql, nor
>>> that we should feel free to add on warts such as $varname that are
>>> completely at odds with the style of the rest of the language. That doesn't
>>> do anything except produce a mess.
>> Well, what it does is avoid breaking compatibility with previous
>> versions of PostgreSQL. I think that actually does have some value.
>> Otherwise, we'd be folding to upper-case by default.
> Well, if we're going to consider 100% backwards compatibility a "must",
> then we should just stick with what the submitted patch does, ie,
> unqualified names are matched first to query columns, and to parameters
> only if there's no column match. This is also per spec if I interpreted
> Peter's comments correctly. The whole thread started because I
> suggested that throwing an error for ambiguous cases might be a better
> design in the long run, but apparently long term ease of code
> maintenance is far down our list of priorities ...
>
>

I think the discussion went off into the weeds somewhat, and I'm guilty
of responding to suggestions that don't refer to the original subject.

For SQL language functions, I think you're right. The only caveat I have
is that if your function name is very long, having to use it as a
disambiguating qualifier can be a bit ugly.

cheers

andrew