Re: named parameters in SQL functions

From: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>
To: "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>
Cc: Andrew Chernow <ac(at)esilo(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: named parameters in SQL functions
Date: 2009-11-15 18:54:00
Message-ID: 407d949e0911151054l47ef1607yad4d2b589e5a2d64@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 6:26 PM, David E. Wheeler <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> wrote:
> Personally, I like $var, but @var would be okay, and @@var is acceptable. But I'm JAPH, so my biases should be obvious.

I'm japh too -- but that doesn't mean grabbing one little aesthetic
from Perl without copying the whole concept behind it makes any sense.
Perl sigils are an important part of the language and are a basic part
of the syntax. They aren't just a "this is a variable" marker.
Dropping one use of them into a language that doesn't use them
anywhere else just makes the language into a mishmash.

I don't see any purpose to using such markers anyways. We have a
parser, we have a symbol table, we should use them; these identifiers
are just like other identifiers.

--
greg

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Simon Riggs 2009-11-15 18:57:55 Re: Summary and Plan for Hot Standby
Previous Message Greg Stark 2009-11-15 18:44:44 Re: named parameters in SQL functions