On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 4:39 PM, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> 2010/9/28 Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>:
>> Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>>> 2010/9/28 Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>:
>>>> As an example, is this a for-in-query or a
>>>> FOR v IN (SELECT arraycol FROM tab) LOOP ...
>>> This is a subquery - so it is a for-in-array - should return one row
>>> with one column.
>> That's not obvious at all. It's legal right now to write that, and it
>> will be interpreted as for-in-query.
> but it has not a sense.
It has a very fine sense. It's completely obvious to me what that
means, and you're proposing to break it. In a word: no.
The Enterprise Postgres Company
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: David Fetter||Date: 2010-09-28 21:03:15|
|Subject: Commitfest: The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly|
|Previous:||From: Pavel Stehule||Date: 2010-09-28 20:41:19|
|Subject: Re: Proposal: plpgsql - "for in array" statement|