On Sun, 26 Jun 2005, Tom Lane wrote:
> "Denis Lussier" <denis@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> > For various technical and backward compatibility reasons, I don't think
> > SQL/PSM should be a replacement for PL/pgSQL. Although I do think it
> > should heavily leverage the solid foundation afforded by the PL/pgSQL
> > code base.
>
> "Solid"? I've wanted for quite some time to throw away plpgsql and
> start over --- there are too many things that need rewritten in it,
> starting with the parser. This project would be a great place to do
> that.
What is wrong on plpgsql code? I see some problems with processing SQL
statements, with efectivity evaluation of expr, but parser is clean (in my
opinion).
what have to be rewriten?
Regards
Pavel Stehule
