Re: Re: proposal - using names as primary names of plpgsql function parameters instead $ based names

From: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Jeevan Chalke <jeevan(dot)chalke(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Re: proposal - using names as primary names of plpgsql function parameters instead $ based names
Date: 2017-09-12 03:14:44
Message-ID: CAFj8pRDi8Dz=QWwHUj3EC_t7uwXqexJp5jdiKJOtOb4YCzsyKg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

2017-09-11 22:28 GMT+02:00 Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>:

> Jeevan Chalke <jeevan(dot)chalke(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> writes:
> [ psql-named-arguments-03-jeevan.patch ]
>
> Pushed with minor simplification of the test case.
>
> I'm not quite as convinced as Pavel that this is an improvement ---
> it will make error messages inconsistent between named and unnamed
> arguments. Still, I follow the point that when there are a lot of
> arguments, $n is pretty unhelpful. We can always revert this if
> we get complaints.
>

Thank you very much

Regards

Pavel

>
> regards, tom lane
>

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Haribabu Kommi 2017-09-12 03:36:37 Re: pg_stat_wal_write statistics view
Previous Message Amit Kapila 2017-09-12 02:31:47 Re: GatherMerge misses to push target list