Re: Named arguments in function calls

From: Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>
To: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>
Cc: Dennis Bjorklund <db(at)zigo(dot)dhs(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Named arguments in function calls
Date: 2004-01-25 23:42:20
Message-ID: 87smi38ujn.fsf@mailbox.samurai.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> writes:
> But the compatibility with Oracle would be awfully nice.

Perhaps I'm missing something here: why is compatibility with Oracle
here particularly worth worrying about? Supporting the same
functionality as Oracle is good, but ISTM supporting the exact same
syntax is far less important. Anyone porting non-trivial PL/SQL to
PostgreSQL will have bigger fish to fry than doing s/=>/AS/ or
what have you.

-Neil

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2004-01-26 00:21:08 Re: Named arguments in function calls
Previous Message Greg Stark 2004-01-25 23:26:05 Re: Disaster!