2008/11/6 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>:
> "Pavel Stehule" <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> writes:
>> 2008/11/6 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>:
>>> RETURN isn't one of them.
>
>> It should be enhanced - my initial proposal of return query expected
>> so return query is last statement, that isn't now. So we could add
>> this check there.
>
> Well, changing the semantics of an already-released statement carries a
> risk of breaking existing apps that aren't expecting it to change FOUND.
> So I'd want to see a pretty strong case why this is important --- not
> just that it didn't meet someone's didn't-read-the-manual expectation.
>
It's should do some problems, but I belive much less than change of
casting or tsearch2 integration. And actually it's not ortogonal.
Every not dynamic statement change FOUND variable.
regards
Pavel Stehule
> regards, tom lane
>
