Pavel Stehule <pavel.steh...@gmail.com> writes: >> Pavel, you didn't say what you think about the WITH FUNCTION proposal? > > I don't like it - this proposal is too "lispish" - it is not SQL
We're not doing lambda here, only extending a facility that we rely on today. The function would be named, for one. I don't know what you mean by SQL being lispish here, and I can't imagine why it would be something to avoid. >> And you didn't say how do you want to turn a utility statement into >> something that is able to return a result set. > > if we support "real" procedures ala sybase procedures (MySQL, MSSQL..) > - then we can return result with same mechanism - there are no > significant difference between DO and CALL statements - you don't know > what will be result type before you call it. Currently we don't have CALL, and we have DO which is not a query but a utility statement. Are you proposing to implement CALL? What would be the difference between making DO a query and having CALL? Regards, -- Dimitri Fontaine http://2ndQuadrant.fr PostgreSQL : Expertise, Formation et Support -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
