On Tue, 2002-07-23 at 11:34, Tom Lane wrote:
> nconway@klamath.dyndns.org (Neil Conway) writes:
> > Regarding the syntax for EXECUTE, it occurs to me that it could be made
> > to be more similar to the PREPARE syntax -- i.e.
>
> > PREPARE foo(text, int) AS ...;
>
> > EXECUTE foo('a', 1);
>
> > (rather than EXECUTE USING -- the effect being that prepared statements
> > now look more like function calls on a syntactical level, which I think
> > is okay.)
>
> Hmm, maybe *too* much like a function call. Is there any risk of a
> conflict with syntax that we might want to use to invoke stored
> procedures? If not, this is fine with me.
Stored procedures would use PERFORM would they not?
I like the function syntax. It looks and acts like a temporary 'sql'
function.
