| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, Jaime Casanova <jaime(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: final patch - plpgsql: for-in-array |
| Date: | 2010-11-18 20:11:32 |
| Message-ID: | 1290110898-sup-2807@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Excerpts from Pavel Stehule's message of jue nov 18 17:00:04 -0300 2010:
> 2010/11/18 Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>:
> >> I didn't say so nobody use it. You, me, David. But I really didn't see
> >> this pattern here in real applications.
> >>
> >
> > Lots of people are told to use it on IRC. Trust me, it's getting well known.
>
> can be. but people on IRC are not representative.
Yeah, that's true. I point out usage of unnest to our customers too,
but it's much more common to see people not using it, instead relying on
subscripts. People using Postgres show up unexpectedly from under
rocks, in the weirdest corners; they rarely consult documentation and
even more rarely get into IRC or mailing list to get help.
I fail to see how this supports the FOR-IN-array development though. It
will just be another unused construct for most people, no?
--
Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2010-11-18 20:18:07 | Re: final patch - plpgsql: for-in-array |
| Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2010-11-18 20:00:04 | Re: final patch - plpgsql: for-in-array |