Re: syntax question

I know it would be non-standard, but I would love to see Postgres support the likes of nested functions.

I know that would be non-standard, but Postgres has lots of non-standard features that make it more like a real programming language and considerably more productive.
On Jun 3, 2021, 12:34 -0700, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 3, 2021 at 03:21:15PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Adrian Klaver <adrian(dot)klaver(at)aklaver(dot)com> writes:
> > > On 6/3/21 12:01 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Jun 3, 2021 at 08:58:03PM +0200, Marc Millas wrote:
> > > > > within a function, I want to create another function.
> >
> > > > You can't create functions inside of functions; same for procedures.
> >
> > > Sure you can:
> >
> > Yeah. The actual problem here is that Marc is expecting variable
> > substitution to occur within a utility (DDL) statement, which it
> > doesn't. The workaround is to build the command as a string and
> > use EXECUTE, as Adrian illustrated:
> >
> > > EXECUTE 'create function ' || bidule || '() RETURNS void language
> > > plpgsql AS $fnc$ BEGIN END; $fnc$ ';
> >
> > This is not terribly well explained in the existing docs. I tried
> > to improve the explanation awhile ago in HEAD:
> >
> > https://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/plpgsql-statements.html#PLPGSQL-STATEMENTS-GENERAL-SQL
>
> Oh, I thought he wanted to declare a function inside the function that
> could be called only by that function, like private functions in Oracle
> packages can do. Yes, you can create a function that defines a function
> that can be called later. I guess you could also create a function that
> _conditionally_ creates a function that it can call itself too. My
> point is that you can't create a function that has function scope ---
> they all have schema scope.
>
> --
> Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> https://momjian.us
> EDB https://enterprisedb.com
>
> If only the physical world exists, free will is an illusion.
>
>
>