| From: | Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | AK <alkuzo(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: why semicolon after begin is not allowed in postgresql? |
| Date: | 2013-11-25 21:25:42 |
| Message-ID: | 1385414742.86872.YahooMailNeo@web162905.mail.bf1.yahoo.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
AK <alkuzo(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> I do see your logic now, but this thing is a common mistake - it
> means that this seems counter-intuitive to some people. What
> would happen if we applied Occam's razor and just removed this
> rule?
>
> All existing code would continue to work as is, and we would have
> one less rule to memorize. That would make PostgreSql a slightly
> better product,
>
> right?
Possibly; but what happens if we want to use plpgsql syntax for
stored procedures which allow the BEGIN command some day? We would
have lost the ability to distinguish that command from the start of
a compound statement.
--
Kevin Grittner
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Heikki Linnakangas | 2013-11-25 21:28:41 | Re: ToDo: fast update of arrays with fixed length fields for PL/pgSQL |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2013-11-25 21:11:41 | Re: Errors on missing pg_subtrans/ files with 9.3 |