AW: [HACKERS] SELECT ... AS ... names in WHERE/GROUP BY/HAVING

From: Zeugswetter Andreas SB <ZeugswetterA(at)wien(dot)spardat(dot)at>
To: "'Ansley, Michael'" <Michael(dot)Ansley(at)intec(dot)co(dot)za>, "''pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org ' '" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org>
Subject: AW: [HACKERS] SELECT ... AS ... names in WHERE/GROUP BY/HAVING
Date: 1999-12-17 09:29:40
Message-ID: 219F68D65015D011A8E000006F8590C603FDC1D3@sdexcsrv1.f000.d0188.sd.spardat.at
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


> Yes, you are right, of course, it doesn't mean that it's incorrect.
> However, assuming that Oracle adheres strictly to the
> standard (which is a
> good, but not infallible, assumption),

Which imho is a bad assumption (take Oracle's outer join syntax e.g.).

> it means that we don't. Of course,
> we may just extend the standard, but in this particular area,
> I'm not sure that it's a good idea,

imho the advantage to have it is big.

> because it can be very confusing, and lead to
> inadvertent mistakes, which can be very difficult to find.

In what particular way ? Please give an example.
Imho it is bad practice if you call your labels like possible
column names anyway.

Andreas

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jose Soares 1999-12-17 09:39:49 Re: [HACKERS] \copy problem
Previous Message Ed Loehr 1999-12-17 08:06:08 Re: [HACKERS] Postmaster options, process spawning, logging, etc.