Re: Proposal: stand-alone composite types - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Eisentraut
Subject Re: Proposal: stand-alone composite types
Date
Msg-id Pine.LNX.4.44.0208092145110.927-100000@localhost.localdomain
Whole thread Raw
In response to Proposal: stand-alone composite types  (Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>)
Responses Re: Proposal: stand-alone composite types  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Joe Conway writes:

> 3. Modify CREATE FUNCTION to allow the implicit creation of a dependent
>     composite type, e.g.:

Forgive this blunt question, but:  Why?

Of course I can see the answer, it's convenient, but wouldn't the system
be more consistent overall if all functions and types are declared
explicitly?

-- 
Peter Eisentraut   peter_e@gmx.net



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Joe Conway
Date:
Subject: Re: Wanted: RelationIsVisible interface
Next
From: Joe Conway
Date:
Subject: Re: Proposal: stand-alone composite types