On 02/09/14 15:46, Craig Ringer wrote:
was "is exactly why we need a new language" and that "All the clumsy stuff we cannot fix in plpgsql, can easily be fixed in plpgsql2, with the most beautiful syntax we can come up with." But you haven't said HOW you propose to fix this one case.
Unfortunately, there is likely to be a (large) variance of opinion concerning the details. In particular 'beautiful/elegant...'. Err - these things are mostly in the eye of the beholder. E.g: I might want this new shiny syntax to be lisp like, as that is beautiful (heh, kidding - but you should get the idea).
Cheers Mark -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
