Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Function call

From: Dennis Bjorklund <db(at)zigo(dot)dhs(dot)org>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Function call
Date: 2004-01-27 20:24:53
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Tue, 27 Jan 2004, Peter Eisentraut wrote:

> just a question of what syntax to use.  Personally, I would be OK with 
> "=>".

That's also what I'm leaning towards now. As Greg suggested, just making
=> a special case as a function parameter. And if one want's to call a
function with an expression containing a => one have to write foo((x=>23))
and not foo(x=>23). That's the current plan I have, I think it's
implementable in a not so ugly way.

If that works out the symbol is not stolen, I would just borrow it a
little when it's the top level of an expression in a function call 

/Dennis Björklund

In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Scott LambDate: 2004-01-27 20:27:53
Subject: Re: Mixing threaded and non-threaded
Previous:From: Dennis BjorklundDate: 2004-01-27 20:20:53
Subject: Re: Function call

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group