Re: Can the string literal syntax for function definitions please be dropped ?

On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 10:38 PM, Greg Sabino Mullane <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com>wrote:

>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: RIPEMD160
>
> > There is a SQL standard for this, and other DBMS look like they found a
> way
> >
> > How come it can not be done ?
>
> It *can* be done, but it won't be done. At least not by default. You might
> get better traction if you perhaps argue for a flag to pg_dump to
> exhibit the behavior you want. It has a small chance of being accepted,
> but a much greater chance than changing the default behavior.
>
> What I want is compatible with existing code and the current default
behavior.
Just look for a LANGUAGE SQL declaration in the function header (before the
body).

If found expect the in-place definition of the function body to follow.
If not found expect a string literal that holds the function body to follow,
with the
LANGUAGE declaration after (default behavior).

I am interested in the functions I write by hand as an application
developer; pg_dump
may dump the functions any way it finds suitable (although I would still
prefer the
conforming form).

Thank you,
Timothy Madden