2013/2/4 Gavin Flower <gavinflo...@archidevsys.co.nz>: > On 04/02/13 21:55, Pavel Stehule wrote: > > 2013/1/2 Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com>: > > On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 11:22 AM, Pavel Stehule <pavel.steh...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > I am not sure, but maybe is time to introduce ANSI SQL syntax for > functions' named parameters > > It is defined in ANSI SQL 2011 > > CALL P (B => 1, A => 2) > > instead PostgreSQL syntax CALL ( B := 1, A := 2) > > Keep in mind that, as recently as PostgreSQL 9.1, we shipped hstore > with a =>(text, text) operator. That operator was deprecated in 9.0, > but it wasn't actually removed until PostgreSQL 9.2. Whenever we do > this, it's going to break things for anyone who hasn't yet upgraded > from hstore v1.0 to hstore v1.1. So I would prefer to wait one more > release. That way, anyone who does an upgrade, say, every other major > release cycle should have a reasonably clean upgrade path. > > I realize that the 4+-year journey toward allowing => rather than := > probably seems tedious to many people by now, but I think the cautious > path we've taken is entirely warranted. As much as I want us to be > standards-compliant in this area, I also want us to not break any more > user applications than necessary along the way. > > Incidentally, I think there are two changes here which should be > considered independently. One, allowing => rather than := for > specifying named parameters. And two, adding a statement called CALL > that can be used to invoke a function. Maybe those are both good > ideas and maybe they aren't, but they're independent. > > can I recapitulate a plan? > > * enabling '=>' in 9.4 > * we will support ':=' too > > What we can (or have to) do now? > > Regards > > Pavel > > > > -- > Robert Haas > EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com > The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company > > I prefer ':=', as I like the ALGOL justification of it.
:= is not in ANSI SQL, so we are sure about '=>' (ADA wins :)) ':=' can be supported as secondary form (and I don't plan remove it) A timing is question now. Regards Pavel > > But I won't even threaten to hold my breath if I'm not allowed to use ':='! > :-) > > > Cheers, > Gavin -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
