| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> |
| Cc: | Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Matthew Draper <matthew(at)trebex(dot)net>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: WIP: Allow SQL-language functions to reference parameters by parameter name |
| Date: | 2011-04-05 19:05:14 |
| Message-ID: | BANLkTimqTAxjegTwXb-AUPoqV_NOmc4Xuw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 1:45 PM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
> On tis, 2011-04-05 at 11:21 -0500, Merlin Moncure wrote:
>> +1 on using $foo. Even with the standardization risk I think it's the
>> best choice. Prefer $"foo" to ${foo} though.
>
> What standardization risk? The standard has already existed for >10
> years and is widely implemented.
What is the standard, and who is it that has implemented it that way?
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2011-04-05 19:27:39 | Re: Visibillity testing - some numbers on current performance. |
| Previous Message | Jesper Krogh | 2011-04-05 19:04:18 | Visibillity testing - some numbers on current performance. |