Re: Schemas vs. PostQUEL: resolving qualified identifiers - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Fernando Nasser
Subject Re: Schemas vs. PostQUEL: resolving qualified identifiers
Date
Msg-id 3C4F31B4.C7C9B2D6@redhat.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Schemas vs. PostQUEL: resolving qualified identifiers  ("Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD" <ZeugswetterA@spardat.at>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote:
> 
> Fernando Nasser <fnasser@redhat.com> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Okay, but then how will you refer unambiguously to the rowtype object?
> 
> > What about casting with the keyord ROW?
> > func(ROW table)
> > always refers to the row-type of table "table" even if there is
> > a column called "table".
> 
> Strikes me as gratuituously different from the way everything else is
> done.  We have .* and %ROWTYPE and so forth, and they're all suffixes.
> The closest analogy to your ROW syntax is CAST, but it doesn't alter the
> initial interpretation of its argument.
> 

I didn't mean literally that way, I just wanted to add a keyword for
solving ambiguity (when there is one).

You are right, it should be:

func(table%ROWTYPE)  




-- 
Fernando Nasser
Red Hat - Toronto                       E-Mail:  fnasser@redhat.com
2323 Yonge Street, Suite #300
Toronto, Ontario   M4P 2C9


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: perl problems in RC1
Next
From: Bill Studenmund
Date:
Subject: Re: RFD: schemas and different kinds of Postgres objects