From: | Fernando Nasser <fnasser(at)redhat(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Schemas vs. PostQUEL: resolving qualified identifiers |
Date: | 2002-01-23 21:57:08 |
Message-ID: | 3C4F31B4.C7C9B2D6@redhat.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Fernando Nasser <fnasser(at)redhat(dot)com> writes:
> > Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Okay, but then how will you refer unambiguously to the rowtype object?
>
> > What about casting with the keyord ROW?
> > func(ROW table)
> > always refers to the row-type of table "table" even if there is
> > a column called "table".
>
> Strikes me as gratuituously different from the way everything else is
> done. We have .* and %ROWTYPE and so forth, and they're all suffixes.
> The closest analogy to your ROW syntax is CAST, but it doesn't alter the
> initial interpretation of its argument.
>
I didn't mean literally that way, I just wanted to add a keyword for
solving ambiguity (when there is one).
You are right, it should be:
func(table%ROWTYPE)
--
Fernando Nasser
Red Hat - Toronto E-Mail: fnasser(at)redhat(dot)com
2323 Yonge Street, Suite #300
Toronto, Ontario M4P 2C9
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2002-01-23 22:02:46 | Re: perl problems in RC1 |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2002-01-23 21:46:01 | Re: RFD: schemas and different kinds of Postgres objects |