2008/6/25 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>:
> "Pavel Stehule" <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> writes:
>>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>>> Your point about the syntax is good though. It would be better if
>>>> the syntax were like
>>>> create function foo (a text, variadic b int[])
>>>> or maybe even better
>>>> create function foo (a text, variadic b int)
>
>> I don't see problem with your syntax. It well block combination OUT
>> and VARIADIC parameter - my one request, variadic parameter have to be
>> array.
>
> Well, we should certainly store the parameter type as an array in
> proargtypes, because that makes this feature transparent to all the
> PLs. However, it doesn't follow that the CREATE FUNCTION syntax
> has to specify the array type rather than the element type. I think
> the Java precedent might be good reason to go with using the element
> type in the function declaration.
>
I am playing with this now and two versions of proargtypes is 30% more
ugly code - mostly pg_dump and paradoxically remove function -
because currently RemoveFuncStatement lost argmode, so I am missing
info about variadic parameter and I can't simply transformation from
element to array. I thing, it isn't good way.
Regards
Pavel Stehule
> regards, tom lane
>
