On 27/05/10 10:16, Pavel Stehule wrote:
2010/5/27 Heikki Linnakangas<heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com>:
On 27/05/10 09:50, Pavel Stehule wrote:
2010/5/27 Heikki Linnakangas<heikki.linnakan...@enterprisedb.com>:
AFAIU, the standard doesn't say anything about named parameters. Oracle
uses
=>, but as you said, that's ambiguous with the => operator.
+1 for FOR.
I don't see any advantage of "FOR".
Any advantage over AS? It doesn't clash with the "foo AS bar" syntax that
the standard is using for something completely different, as Peter pointed
out in the original post.
No, standard knows "AS" in different context. In param list standard
doesn't use keyword "AS".
As Peter pointed out in the original post, according to the standard
"function(foo AS bar)" means something else than what we have now.
Please re-read the original post.
We can change ir to support new standard or don't change it.
What new standard?
ANSI SQL 2011
Oh, does that have something to say about named parameters? Is the draft
publicly available somewhere?
--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
