On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 4:35 PM, Pavel Stehule <pavel.steh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I know that Oracle uses syntax of this general type, but I've always
>> found it ugly.  It's also pretty non-extensible.  You could want
>> similar things for range types and any other container types we might
>> get in the future, but clearly adding new reserved words for each one
>> is no good.
> It doesn't use reserved worlds.

OK - keywords, then.

>> One idea that occurs to me is: If you can DECLARE BAR FOO%TYPE, but
>> then you want to make BAR an array of that type rather than a scalar,
>> why not write that as DECLARE BAR FOO%TYPE[]?  That seems quite
>> natural to me.
> what you propose for syntax for taking a element of array?

No idea.

>> I think the part of this patch that makes %TYPE work for more kinds of
>> types is probably a good idea, although I haven't carefully studied
>> exactly what it does.
> I invite any ideas, but currently used notation is only in direction
> type->array. The working with symbols looks more difficult, than using words
> (in design area).
> More - the textual form is more near to our system of polymorphics types:
> anyelement, anyarray, ... We have not anyelement[]

True, but this is hardly a straightforward extension of what we have
today either.

Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to