Joel Burton wrote: > > > As per earlier vague hint, I'm bringing the CREATE FUNCTION syntax in line > > with SQL99. Everything is fully backward compatible. Here is the new > > synopsis: > > > > CREATE [OR REPLACE] FUNCTION name (args) RETURNS type > > option [ option... ] [WITH (...)]; > > > > where option is any of these in any order: > > > > AS string [,string] > > LANGUAGE name > > IMMUTABLE > > STABLE > > VOLATILE > > CALLED ON NULL INPUT -- SQL spelling of not "strict" > > RETURNS NULL ON NULL INPUT -- SQL spelling of "strict" > > STRICT > > [EXTERNAL] SECURITY DEFINER -- SQL spelling of "setuid" > > [EXTERNAL] SECURITY INVOKER -- SQL spelling of not "setuid" > > IMPLICIT CAST > > > > (The SECURITY options are noops right now, but I'm planning to implement > > them next.) > > > > The WITH (...) options are still there, but sort of less encouraged, I > > guess. > > Is there any standardized way of handling the single-quotes within function > definition? Rather than doubling them up (which can make for very messy code > when your scripting language uses single quotes!), allowing another symbol > to be used, with that symbol be declared in the CREATE FUNCTION line? > Interbase uses a system like this: you can set the delimiter to anything you > want and use that instead of '.
That would be great! The quoting makes pl/pgsql a major pain. It, and dependency tracking. Of course, with PL/SQL, Oracle doesn't even require a delimiter: CREATE PROCEDURE foo(x INTEGER) AS ... END; Somehow they manage to get that past their parser, even if the procedure has "Compilation Errors". It would be sweet... Mike Mascari [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
