Re: Name column

2010/9/24 André Fernandes <andre(dot)de(dot)camargo(dot)fernandes(at)hotmail(dot)com>:
>
>
>> Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2010 08:01:35 -0400
>> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Name column
>> From: robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com
>> To: heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com
>> CC: arhipov(at)dc(dot)baikal(dot)ru; pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 6:35 AM, Heikki Linnakangas
>> <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>> > For historical reasons PostgreSQL supports calling a function with a
>> > single
>> > argument like "column.function", in addition to "function(column)".
>> > There is
>> > a function "name(text)" that casts the input to the 'name' datatype, so
>> > your
>> > example casts the row to text and from text to name.
>>
>> I'm starting to wonder if we should think about deprecating this
>> behavior. It is awfully confusing and unintuitive.
>>
>
> I agree, it is very unintuitive.
> +1  for deprecating this behavior.

+1

I dislike this feature too. It is breaking other ANSI SQL feature -
constructors, because it has same syntax tablename(field1, field2,
....). Sure, usually we can do

ROW(a,b,c)::type - but little bit nicer and with standard is type(a,b,c).

Regards

Pavel Stehule
>