On Sun, 26 Jun 2005, Tom Lane wrote: > "Denis Lussier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > For various technical and backward compatibility reasons, I don't think > > SQL/PSM should be a replacement for PL/pgSQL. Although I do think it > > should heavily leverage the solid foundation afforded by the PL/pgSQL > > code base. > > "Solid"? I've wanted for quite some time to throw away plpgsql and > start over --- there are too many things that need rewritten in it, > starting with the parser. This project would be a great place to do > that.
What is wrong on plpgsql code? I see some problems with processing SQL statements, with efectivity evaluation of expr, but parser is clean (in my opinion). what have to be rewriten? Regards Pavel Stehule ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
