From: | sad <sad(at)bankir(dot)ru> |
---|---|
To: | Stephan Szabo <sszabo(at)megazone(dot)bigpanda(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Gregory S(dot) Williamson" <gsw(at)globexplorer(dot)com>, pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: feature request ? |
Date: | 2004-06-24 13:24:14 |
Message-ID: | 200406241724.14810.sad@bankir.ru |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-sql |
> then lots of currently perfectly correct
> programs break. If they're the same, then ELSE has different meanings
> depending on whether NULL is specified, and that's generally bad from an
> understanding the language standpoint.
i've already thougth on this
new control structure needed
but the name of the IF is perfect %-)
> In addition, either adding a FALSE and NULL or just a NULL still involves
> looking at the rest of the IF semantics to make sure they make sense. How
> do those interact with ELSIF blocks?
that is because we used to two-valued BOOL...
but anyway i see no clear way to generalize ELSEIF.
may i suppose it was wrong to historically define IF as two-blocks control in
plpgsql ?
forget it.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Stephan Szabo | 2004-06-24 13:25:05 | Re: feature request ? |
Previous Message | sad | 2004-06-24 12:55:26 | Re: feature request ? |