Re: WIP: Allow SQL-language functions to reference parameters by parameter name - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Merlin Moncure
Subject Re: WIP: Allow SQL-language functions to reference parameters by parameter name
Date
Msg-id BANLkTingTngVenpQ1Hsh76BwMROr1gSk0A@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: WIP: Allow SQL-language functions to reference parameters by parameter name  ("David E. Wheeler" <david@kineticode.com>)
Responses Re: WIP: Allow SQL-language functions to reference parameters by parameter name  (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>)
Re: WIP: Allow SQL-language functions to reference parameters by parameter name  (Darren Duncan <darren@darrenduncan.net>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 10:05 PM, David E. Wheeler <david@kineticode.com> wrote:
> On Mar 25, 2011, at 9:12 PM, Robert Haas wrote:
>
>>
>> As I've said before, I believe that the root cause of this problem is
>> that using the same syntax for variables and column names is a bad
>> idea in the first place.  If we used $foo or ?foo or ${foo} or $.foo
>> or &&foo!!$#? to mean "the parameter called foo", then this would all
>> be a non-issue.
>
> Yes *please*. Man that would make maintenance of such functions easier.

+1 on using $foo.  Even with the standardization risk I think it's the
best choice. Prefer $"foo" to ${foo} though.

merlin


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Merlin Moncure
Date:
Subject: Re: Set hint bits upon eviction from BufMgr
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Support comments on FOREIGN DATA WRAPPER and SERVER objects.