Re: proposal: FOREACH-IN-ARRAY (probably for 9.2?) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Pavel Stehule
Subject Re: proposal: FOREACH-IN-ARRAY (probably for 9.2?)
Date
Msg-id AANLkTikhf7siWj3Pk1rb3E_54fpnN-BFUnzcb7D1=OnK@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: proposal: FOREACH-IN-ARRAY (probably for 9.2?)  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
2010/12/17 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>:
> Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> writes:
>> Second semi argument for using ARRAY keyword is a verbosity of
>> PL/pgSQL. So from this perspective a ARRAY should be minimally
>> optional and ensure, so expr result will be really a array. But with a
>> optional ARRAY keyword we leaving a simple enhancing in future (on
>> parser level).
>
> No.  If we are going to put a keyword there, it can't be optional.
> Making it optional would require it to be a fully reserved word
> --- and in the case of ARRAY, even that isn't good enough, because
> of the conflict with ARRAY[...] syntax.

yes, it's true

Pavel

>
>                        regards, tom lane
>


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: unlogged tables vs. GIST
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: ps_status on fastpath