From: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Artur Zakirov <a(dot)zakirov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: plpgsql - DECLARE - cannot to use %TYPE or %ROWTYPE for composite types |
Date: | 2016-01-18 21:35:41 |
Message-ID: | CAFj8pRAzQyQgnecbEA_2pQFeCN7itj-yUuDJf_e7b=caDds8Zw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
2016-01-18 22:21 GMT+01:00 Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>:
> On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 3:51 PM, Alvaro Herrera
> <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> wrote:
> > BTW are we all agreed that enabling
> > foo%ARRAYTYPE
> > and
> > foo%ELEMENTYPE
> > in plpgsql's DECLARE section is what we want for this?
>
> I know that Oracle uses syntax of this general type, but I've always
> found it ugly. It's also pretty non-extensible. You could want
> similar things for range types and any other container types we might
> get in the future, but clearly adding new reserved words for each one
> is no good.
>
It doesn't use reserved worlds.
>
> One idea that occurs to me is: If you can DECLARE BAR FOO%TYPE, but
> then you want to make BAR an array of that type rather than a scalar,
> why not write that as DECLARE BAR FOO%TYPE[]? That seems quite
> natural to me.
>
what you propose for syntax for taking a element of array?
>
> I think the part of this patch that makes %TYPE work for more kinds of
> types is probably a good idea, although I haven't carefully studied
> exactly what it does.
>
I invite any ideas, but currently used notation is only in direction
type->array. The working with symbols looks more difficult, than using
words (in design area).
More - the textual form is more near to our system of polymorphics types:
anyelement, anyarray, ... We have not anyelement[]
Regards
Pavel
>
> --
> Robert Haas
> EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Kevin Grittner | 2016-01-18 21:42:42 | Re: [PATCH] Improve spinlock inline assembly for x86. |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2016-01-18 21:33:52 | Re: Fwd: [JDBC] Re: 9.4-1207 behaves differently with server side prepared statements compared to 9.2-1102 |