> "Pavel Stehule" <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> writes: >> I understand now why Oracle use => symbol for named params. This isn't >> used so operator - so implementation is trivial. > > You really didn't understand the objection at all, did you? > > The point is not about whether there is any built-in operator named =>. > The point is that people might have created user-defined operators named > that.
I understand well, so only I don't see better solution. Yes, everyone who used => should have problems, but it is similar with .. new keywords, etc. Probably easy best syntax doesn't exist :(. I haven't idea who use => now and how often, and if this feature is possible in pg, but there are not technical barriers.
