> > > > 2013/8/23 Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com> > I think so is not good if some programming language functionality does one > in one context (functions) and does something else in second context > (procedures).
It's not really different -- it means 'return if able'. Also there are a lot of things that would have to be different for other reasons especially transaction management. It's not reasonable to expect same behavior in function vs procedure context -- especially in terms of sending output to the caller.
> On second hand, I am thinking so requirement PERFORM is good. A query that > does some, but result is ignored, is strange (and it can be a performance > fault), so we should not be too friendly in this use case.
Completely disagree. There are many cases where this is *not* strange. For example: SELECT writing_func(some_col) FROM foo;
it is about a personal taste - if you prefer more verbose or less verbose languages.
I feeling a PERFORM usage as something special and you example is nice case, where I am think so PERFORM is good for verbosity.
