Re: proposal sql: labeled function params - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Pavel Stehule
Subject Re: proposal sql: labeled function params
Date
Msg-id 162867790808222321q7ddc7a89s1a213c69a7e8373e@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: proposal sql: labeled function params  (Hannu Krosing <hannu@2ndQuadrant.com>)
Responses Re: proposal sql: labeled function params
List pgsql-hackers
Hello

2008/8/22 Hannu Krosing <hannu@2ndquadrant.com>:
> On Thu, 2008-08-21 at 23:41 -0500, Decibel! wrote:
>> On Aug 20, 2008, at 8:26 AM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>
>> How about we poll -general and see what people say? I'll bet Tom a
>> beer that no one replies saying they've created a => operator (unless
>> maybe PostGIS uses it).
>
> Does Oracle use => for "labeled function params" or just named
> arguments ?
>

Oracle use it for named arguments - what I know, similar it doesn't
allow functionality as labeled params publicly - SQL/XML use it.

>> If we're really worried about it we can have a GUC for a few versions
>> that turns off named parameter assignment. But I don't think we
>> should compromise the design on the theory that some folks might be
>> using that as an operator *and* can't change their application to
>> wrap it's use in ().
>
> I still think that better approach is allowing RECORD as input type and
> do all the things Pavel proposed with a function that iterates over
> record.
>

record or hash table - it's implementation - second step. We have to
find syntax and semantic now.

Pavel

> --------------
> Hannu
>
>
>


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Pavel Stehule"
Date:
Subject: Re: proposal sql: labeled function params
Next
From: David Fetter
Date:
Subject: Re: WITH RECURSIVE patches 0818