Robert Haas wrote:
>> You do know that SQL is Turing-complete, right?
>>
>
> That seems largely irrelevant to the problem at hand. It's not
> impossible to do syntactic transformations from one Turing-complete
> langauge to another; if it were, there could be no such thing as a
> compiler.
>
>
>
If we were engaged in an academic exercise this might be interesting.
But we aren't. The fact that one can do something is not an argument for
actually doing it.
cheers
andrew
