From: | Pavel Stehule <stehule(at)kix(dot)fsv(dot)cvut(dot)cz> |
---|---|
To: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
Cc: | neilc(at)samurai(dot)com, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pl/pgsql: END verbosity |
Date: | 2005-06-22 19:47:51 |
Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.44.0506222137440.14390-100000@kix.fsv.cvut.cz |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches |
On Tue, 21 Jun 2005, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Neil Conway said:
> > In PL/PgSQL, "END LOOP" is used to terminate loop blocks, and "END IF"
> > is used to terminate IF blocks. This is needlessly verbose: we could
> > simply accept "END" in both cases without syntactic ambiguity. I'd like
> > to make this change, so that END can be used to terminate any kind of
> > block. There's no need to remove support for the present syntax, of
> > course, so there's no backward compatibility concern. Oracle's PL/SQL
> > does require "END IF" and "END LOOP", but folks interested in maximum
> > compatibility can always use those forms if they like.
> >
Hello,
I prefer actual syntax too, Neil. The reason isn't compatibility with
Oracle, but better readibility - it's mean more work with finishing code
but less with debugging
Regards
Pavel
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-06-22 19:50:04 | Re: [PATCHES] O_DIRECT for WAL writes |
Previous Message | Greg Stark | 2005-06-22 19:38:50 | Re: Why is checkpoint so costly? |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-06-22 19:50:04 | Re: [PATCHES] O_DIRECT for WAL writes |
Previous Message | Greg Stark | 2005-06-22 19:25:00 | Re: [PATCHES] O_DIRECT for WAL writes |