Re: proposal: plpgsql - Assert statement

2014-11-19 17:43 GMT+01:00 Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>:

> On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 11:13 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> > Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
> >> On 11/19/2014 06:35 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> >>> I seem to share the same opinion with Andrew: its not going to hurt to
> >>> include this, but its not gonna cause dancing in the streets either. I
> >>> would characterize that as 2 very neutral and unimpressed people, plus
> >>> 3 in favour. Which seems enough to commit.
> >
> >> That's about right, although I would put it a bit stronger than that.
> >> But if we're the only people unimpressed I'm not going to object
> further.
> >
> > FWIW, I would vote against it also. I do not find this to be a natural
> > extension of RAISE; it adds all sorts of semantic issues. (In
> particular,
> > what is the evaluation order of the WHEN versus the other subexpressions
> > of the RAISE?)
>
> What I liked about this syntax was that we could eventually have:
>
> RAISE ASSERT WHEN stuff;
>
> ...and if assertions are disabled, we can skip evaluating the
> condition. If you just write an IF .. THEN block you can't do that.
>

I share this idea. It is possible next step

Pavel

>
> --
> Robert Haas
> EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
>