| From: | songjinzhou <2903807914(at)qq(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Pavel Stehule" <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Re: Support plpgsql multi-range in conditional control |
| Date: | 2023-01-25 14:39:25 |
| Message-ID: | tencent_E60BD4A00C71528DAD8FD743E34E82291805@qq.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hello, this is the target I refer to. At present, our patch supports this usage, so I later thought of developing this patch.
songjinzhou(2903807914(at)qq(dot)com)
From: Pavel Stehule
Date: 2023-01-25 22:21
To: songjinzhou
CC: pgsql-hackers
Subject: Re: Re: Support plpgsql multi-range in conditional control
Hi
st 25. 1. 2023 v 15:18 odesílatel songjinzhou <2903807914(at)qq(dot)com> napsal:
Hello, this usage scenario is from Oracle's PL/SQL language (I have been doing the function development of PL/SQL language for some time). I think this patch is very practical and will expand our for loop scenario. In short, I look forward to your
I don't see any real usage. PL/SQL doesn't support proposed syntax.
Regards
Pavel
reply.
Happy Chinese New Year!
songjinzhou(2903807914(at)qq(dot)com)
Maybe you didn't understand my reply. Without some significant real use case, I am strongly against the proposed feature and merging your patch to upstream. I don't see any reason to enhance language with this feature.
Regards
Pavel
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2023-01-25 14:41:18 | Re: More pgindent tweaks |
| Previous Message | David G. Johnston | 2023-01-25 14:38:51 | Re: CREATE ROLE bug? |