2008/6/25 Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > "Pavel Stehule" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>> Tom Lane wrote: >>>> Your point about the syntax is good though. It would be better if >>>> the syntax were like >>>> create function foo (a text, variadic b int) >>>> or maybe even better >>>> create function foo (a text, variadic b int) > >> I don't see problem with your syntax. It well block combination OUT >> and VARIADIC parameter - my one request, variadic parameter have to be >> array. > > Well, we should certainly store the parameter type as an array in > proargtypes, because that makes this feature transparent to all the > PLs. However, it doesn't follow that the CREATE FUNCTION syntax > has to specify the array type rather than the element type. I think > the Java precedent might be good reason to go with using the element > type in the function declaration.
I afraid so Java syntax isn't good inspiration http://www.java-tips.org/java-se-tips/java.lang/using-the-varargs-language-feature.html http://www.clanproductions.com/java5.html they use symbol ... like specific synonym to . public Method getMethod(String name, Class... parameterTypes) I didn't find any info about vararg in Oracle - it uses collection and it allows implicit constructors for emulation o variadic functions - but "variadic" argument isn't scalar too. So I invite any opinions about it. Regards Pavel Stehule > > regards, tom lane > -- Sent via pgsql-patches mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-patches