From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Proposal: plpgsql - "for in array" statement |
Date: | 2010-09-28 20:32:50 |
Message-ID: | 28428.1285705970@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> 2010/9/28 Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>:
>> As an example, is this a for-in-query or a
>> for-in-array?
>>
>> FOR v IN (SELECT arraycol FROM tab) LOOP ...
> This is a subquery - so it is a for-in-array - should return one row
> with one column.
That's not obvious at all. It's legal right now to write that, and it
will be interpreted as for-in-query. Furthermore, there are cases where
it's essential to be able to write a left paren before SELECT, so that
you can control the precedence of UNION/INTERSECT/EXCEPT constructs.
So you're proposing to remove functionality and break existing code in
order to have a "simple" syntax for for-in-array.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2010-09-28 20:37:57 | Re: Proposal: plpgsql - "for in array" statement |
Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2010-09-28 20:24:30 | Re: Proposal: plpgsql - "for in array" statement |