Re: proposal: disallow operator "=>" and use it for named parameters

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: proposal: disallow operator "=>" and use it for named parameters
Date: 2015-03-10 18:02:47
Message-ID: 32076.1426010567@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Kevin Grittner <kgrittn(at)ymail(dot)com> writes:
> Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Presumably we are going to change it at some point; maybe we
>> should just do it rather than waiting another 5 years.

> +1

> It has been deprecated long enough that I don't see the point of waiting.

Uh, just to clarify, this has nothing to do with how long the operator has
been deprecated. The issue is whether pg_dump should dump a function-call
syntax that will not be recognized by any pre-9.5 release, when there is
an alternative that will be recognized back to 9.0.

BTW, I just noticed another place that probably should be changed:

regression=# select foo(x => 1);
ERROR: 42883: function foo(x := integer) does not exist
LINE 1: select foo(x => 1);
^
HINT: No function matches the given name and argument types. You might need to add explicit type casts.
LOCATION: ParseFuncOrColumn, parse_func.c:516

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2015-03-10 18:15:38 Re: Precedence of standard comparison operators
Previous Message Kevin Grittner 2015-03-10 17:44:49 Re: proposal: disallow operator "=>" and use it for named parameters