| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Timothy Madden <terminatorul(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Adrian Klaver <aklaver(at)comcast(dot)net>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Subject: | Re: Can the string literal syntax for function definitions please be dropped ? |
| Date: | 2009-10-25 22:42:09 |
| Message-ID: | 20091025224209.GB5516@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Timothy Madden escribió:
> Anyway Posgres offers a CREATE FUNCTION statement that resembles or should
> resemble that in the standard, and that is what I am talking about.
"Should" being the operative word in that sentence. If you want to
submit a patch to move us closer towards the SQL/PSM goal, I'm sure it
will be welcome.
> I just want the Postgres version of the statement to look more like
> the standard one.
Sure. If we weren't all pointing in that general direction, we would
probably have CONNECT BY instead of WITH RECURSIVE.
> Would you detail the differences you talk about that you see here ?
I'm not that familiar with SQL/PSM, sorry. Pavel Stehule is da man.
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Timothy Madden | 2009-10-25 23:06:33 | Re: Can the string literal syntax for function definitions please be dropped ? |
| Previous Message | Timothy Madden | 2009-10-25 22:20:51 | Re: Can the string literal syntax for function definitions please be dropped ? |