Re: proposal sql: labeled function params

2008/8/16 Decibel! <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>:
> On Aug 15, 2008, at 1:20 PM, Hannu Krosing wrote:
>>>
>>> "value AS name", on the other hand, accomplishes the same in a more
>>> SQL-looking fashion with no new reserved word (since AS is already
>>> fully reserved).
>>
>> would it be more natural / SQL-like to use "value AS name" or "name AS
>> value" ?
>
>
> IMHO, *natural* would be name *something* value, because that's how every
> other language I've seen does it.
>
> SQL-like would be value AS name, but I'm not a fan of putting the value
> before the name. And I think value AS name will just lead to a ton of
> confusion.
>
> Since I think it'd be very unusual to do a => (b => c), I'd vote that we
> just go with =>. Anyone trying to do a => b => c should immediately question
> if that would work.

I'll look on this syntax - what is really means for implementation. I
thing, mostly of us prefer this or similar syntax.

Regards
Pavel Stehule

> --
> Decibel!, aka Jim C. Nasby, Database Architect decibel(at)decibel(dot)org
> Give your computer some brain candy! www.distributed.net Team #1828
>
>
>