| From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | AK <alkuzo(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: why semicolon after begin is not allowed in postgresql? |
| Date: | 2013-11-25 21:01:39 |
| Message-ID: | 5293BAB3.4010605@dunslane.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 11/25/2013 03:42 PM, AK wrote:
> Kevin,
>
> I do see your logic now, but this thing is a common mistake - it means that
> this seems counter-intuitive to some people. What would happen if we applied
> Occam's razor and just removed this rule?
>
> All existing code would continue to work as is, and we would have one less
> rule to memorize. That would make PostgreSql a slightly better product,
> right?
>
>
>
It would make it a worse product, being inconsistent and stupid. The
rule is that you use semicolons to terminate statements. 'begin' on its
own is not a complete statement. Therefore it should not be followed by
a semicolon.
Several people have explained this basis of the rule. It's not
counter-intuitive to me or lots of other people.
cheers
andrew
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2013-11-25 21:06:30 | Re: Errors on missing pg_subtrans/ files with 9.3 |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2013-11-25 20:52:25 | Re: Errors on missing pg_subtrans/ files with 9.3 |