Re: Issues for named/mixed function notation patch - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Pavel Stehule
Subject Re: Issues for named/mixed function notation patch
Date
Msg-id 162867790910071531q42db84e7j477b5ca20b9491dd@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Issues for named/mixed function notation patch  (Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
2009/10/7 Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>:
> On Wed, 2009-10-07 at 23:32 +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>> It's same as my origin ideas, much better formulated. It is ok for me.
>
> You indicated that there may be some implementation difficulty if the
> VARIADIC keyword is required for calling using named notation:
>
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-09/msg01792.php
>
> Do you think it would be reasonable to implement?

I thing, so this is possible. But it needs  some instructions more. I
would not add some "unnecessary" checks. It needs one cycle over
parameters more (and one array).

* check if last variadic parameter isn't default
* check if last variadic parameter has flag VARIADIC
* check if there are not any other parameter with VARIADIC flag
* some correction in gram.y (procedural code), that allows VARIADIC in
any position when named notation is active.

Pavel

>
> Regards,
>        Jeff Davis
>
>


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Pavel Stehule
Date:
Subject: Re: Issues for named/mixed function notation patch
Next
From: Jeff Davis
Date:
Subject: Re: Issues for named/mixed function notation patch