On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 12:49 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> "David E. Wheeler" <david@kineticode.com> writes:
>> I'd sure love $, as it's like shell, Perl, and other stuff.
>
> This discussion has gotten utterly off track. The problem I am trying
> to solve is a non-Oracle-compatible behavior in plpgsql. I have got
> substantially less than zero interest in proposals that "solve" the
> problem by introducing notations that don't even pretend to be
> compatible.
Personally, I'd vote against a GUC option. I just plain don't like the
idea that a function could do different things depending on server
configuration. TBH, I'm not very happy with #option either. That
said, I agree that Oracle method is far better.
Maybe invent a new language handler? plpgsql2 or shorten to pgsql?
Now you can mess around all you want (and maybe fix some other
compatibility warts at the same time).
merlin
