| From: | Gavin Sherry <swm(at)linuxworld(dot)com(dot)au> |
|---|---|
| To: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: SQL-Invoked Procedures for 8.1 |
| Date: | 2004-10-07 14:07:12 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.58.0410080002350.16338@linuxworld.com.au |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, 6 Oct 2004, Josh Berkus wrote:
[snip]
> Of course, this is as true of functions as it will be of procedures. So half
> the functionality that I'm angling for to support with calling named params
> could be accomplished within the context of overloading just by extending the
> named param patch in 8.0 to cover calling functions/SPs in the format above.
We cannot use named parameter notation with functions due to overloading.
Disregarding the idea of default values, consider:
create function foo(i int, j int) ...
create function foo(j int, i int) ...
If we did:
SELECT foo(j => 1, i => 2)
we would have two candidate functions. So, AFAICT, we cannot used named
parameters with functions. :-(
Gavin
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2004-10-07 14:17:08 | Re: pgindent complaint of the day |
| Previous Message | Reini Urban | 2004-10-07 12:48:33 | Re: [HACKERS] open item: tablespace handing in pg_dump/pg_restore |