On Sat, Dec 28, 2019 at 2:02 PM Vik Fearing <vik.fear...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > these keywords are syntactically distinct from ordinary names. Given > > the precedent that "+" and "@" prefixes change what an identifier means, > > maybe we could use "*" or some other punctuation character as a keyword > > prefix? We'd have to give grandfather exceptions to the existing > > keywords, at least for a while, but we could say that new ones won't be > > recognized without the prefix. > > I'm all for this (and even suggested it during the IRC conversation that > prompted this patch). It's rife with bikeshedding, though. My original > proposal was to use '&' and Andrew Gierth would have used ':'.
I think this is a good proposal regardless of which character we decide to use. My order of preference from highest-to-lowest would probably be :*&, but maybe that's just because I'm reading this on Sunday rather than on Tuesday. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
