| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: proposal: FOREACH-IN-ARRAY (probably for 9.2?) |
| Date: | 2010-12-17 17:23:32 |
| Message-ID: | 4D0B9C94.8090108@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 12/17/2010 12:15 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> 2010/12/17 Itagaki Takahiro<itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)gmail(dot)com>:
>>
>> It should be not a main subject, but I remember there was a discussion
>> that "IN ARRAY array-expression" looks redundant for a literal array:
>>
>> IN ARRAY ARRAY[1, 3, 5]
>>
>> Are there any improvement for the issue?
> yes. It know it. The reason for this is bigger space for possible
> future features related to FOREACH loop.
>
So what you're saying is we need to allow ugliness now so we can have
more ugliness in future? I don't find that a convincing argument. I
share the dislike for this syntax.
cheers
andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2010-12-17 17:26:50 | Re: proposal: FOREACH-IN-ARRAY (probably for 9.2?) |
| Previous Message | Merlin Moncure | 2010-12-17 17:21:35 | Re: proposal: FOREACH-IN-ARRAY (probably for 9.2?) |