Re: [HACKERS] merging some features from plpgsql2 project - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Marko Tiikkaja
Subject Re: [HACKERS] merging some features from plpgsql2 project
Date
Msg-id CAL9smLA4bZFFF4w1b_ahpR=xEA1wAhnLLKwnWwX=_+gGJivvyg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] merging some features from plpgsql2 project  (Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@BlueTreble.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] merging some features from plpgsql2 project  (Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@BlueTreble.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 12:47 AM, Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@bluetreble.com> wrote:
On 1/9/17 5:30 PM, Marko Tiikkaja wrote:
My idea was that the currently unsupported combination of NOT NULL and
no DEFAULT would mean "has to be assigned to a non-NULL value before it
can be read from, or an exception is thrown".  Solves the most common
use case and is backwards compatible.

That won't allow you to use a variable in multiple places though... is there a reason we couldn't support something like IS DEFINED and UNSET?

I don't understand what your use case is.  Could you demonstrate that with some code you'd write if these features were in?


.m

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Jim Nasby
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] merging some features from plpgsql2 project
Next
From: Jim Nasby
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] merging some features from plpgsql2 project