On Fri, 2003-03-21 at 12:12, Tom Lane wrote:
> I agree that the second of these is bogus.  I'm ambivalent about
> changing the first; it's odd but perhaps there are apps out there
> that depend on it.  Any other opinions out there?

For what it's worth, I noticed that the first (DECLARE CURSOR replacing
existing cursors with the same name) doesn't seem to be allowed by the
SQL spec:

(Section 14.1, Syntax Rules)

1. If a <declare cursor> is contained in an SQL-client module M, then:

        (a) The <cursor name> shall not be equivalent to the <cursor
        name> of any other <declare cursor> in M.

Personally, I'm inclined to change both of these cases to result in an



---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

Reply via email to