I know it would be non-standard, but I would love to see Postgres support the likes of nested functions.
I know that would be non-standard, but Postgres has lots of non-standard features that make it more like a real programming language and considerably more productive. On Jun 3, 2021, 12:34 -0700, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us>, wrote: > On Thu, Jun 3, 2021 at 03:21:15PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > > Adrian Klaver <adrian.kla...@aklaver.com> writes: > > > On 6/3/21 12:01 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > > On Thu, Jun 3, 2021 at 08:58:03PM +0200, Marc Millas wrote: > > > > > within a function, I want to create another function. > > > > > > You can't create functions inside of functions; same for procedures. > > > > > Sure you can: > > > > Yeah. The actual problem here is that Marc is expecting variable > > substitution to occur within a utility (DDL) statement, which it > > doesn't. The workaround is to build the command as a string and > > use EXECUTE, as Adrian illustrated: > > > > > EXECUTE 'create function ' || bidule || '() RETURNS void language > > > plpgsql AS $fnc$ BEGIN END; $fnc$ '; > > > > This is not terribly well explained in the existing docs. I tried > > to improve the explanation awhile ago in HEAD: > > > > https://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/plpgsql-statements.html#PLPGSQL-STATEMENTS-GENERAL-SQL > > Oh, I thought he wanted to declare a function inside the function that > could be called only by that function, like private functions in Oracle > packages can do. Yes, you can create a function that defines a function > that can be called later. I guess you could also create a function that > _conditionally_ creates a function that it can call itself too. My > point is that you can't create a function that has function scope --- > they all have schema scope. > > -- > Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> https://momjian.us > EDB https://enterprisedb.com > > If only the physical world exists, free will is an illusion. > > >
