Re: plpgsql - DECLARE - cannot to use %TYPE or %ROWTYPE for composite types

From: Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Artur Zakirov <a(dot)zakirov(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: plpgsql - DECLARE - cannot to use %TYPE or %ROWTYPE for composite types
Date: 2016-01-20 05:30:21
Message-ID: CAFj8pRDubAdsGPr6YtCb92hFfqOhMOtmF5eLVhMbyOKVOR0DLQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

2016-01-20 0:34 GMT+01:00 Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>:

> On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 4:53 AM, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
> wrote:
> > It is, but sometime the polymorphic types can help.
> >
> > The proposed feature/syntax has sense primary for polymorphic types. It
> > should to follow our polymorphic types. The primary pair is
> > "anyarray","anyelement" -> "arraytype","elemementtype".
> >
> > If you don't use polymorphic parameters in plpgsql, then proposed feature
> > can look like useless.
>
> I don't think it's useless, but I do think the syntax is ugly. Maybe
> it's the best we can do and we should just live with it, but Alvaro
> asked for opinions, so there's mine.
>

ok

5 years ago, maybe more - I proposed more nice syntax - and it was rejected
as too complex (reserved worlds was required). So this solution try to
attack it from different side. It is simple and effective.

Regards

Pavel

>
> --
> Robert Haas
> EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
>

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Masahiko Sawada 2016-01-20 05:35:02 Re: Support for N synchronous standby servers - take 2
Previous Message Amit Kapila 2016-01-20 04:49:14 Re: RFC: replace pg_stat_activity.waiting with something more descriptive