From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Matthew Draper <matthew(at)trebex(dot)net> |
Cc: | Hitoshi Harada <umi(dot)tanuki(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Patch: Allow SQL-language functions to reference parameters by parameter name |
Date: | 2012-02-05 00:30:35 |
Message-ID: | 5182.1328401835@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Matthew Draper <matthew(at)trebex(dot)net> writes:
> [ sql-named-param-refs-v2.patch ]
Applied with some editorialization: I switched the behavior for two-part
names as discussed, and did some other mostly-cosmetic code cleanup,
and did some work on the documentation.
> I'm still not sure whether to just revise (almost) all the SQL function
> examples to use parameter names, and declare them the "right" choice; as
> it's currently written, named parameters still seem rather second-class.
They're less second-class in the docs as committed, but I left a lot of
examples still using $n for parameters. I'm not sure how far to go in
that direction. We should not be too eager to scrub the docs of $n,
because if nothing else people will need to understand the notation when
they see it for a long time to come. But feel free to submit a
follow-up docs patch if you feel more is warranted.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Noah Misch | 2012-02-05 01:18:49 | Re: initdb and fsync |
Previous Message | Jeff Davis | 2012-02-04 23:41:27 | Re: initdb and fsync |