Re: [HACKERS] proposal: disallow operator "=>" and use it for named parameters

[Robert Haas]

On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 9:11 PM, Bruce Momjian  wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 02:51:30PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 2:32 PM, Pavel Stehule  
>> wrote:
>> > 1. funcname_signature_string
>> > 2. get_rule_expr
>>
>> Thanks.  Patch attached.  I'll commit this if there are no objections.
>
> Robert, are you going to apply this?

Good catch.  I had totally forgotten about this.  Committed now, thanks.

-- 
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:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: disallow operator "=>" and use it for named parameters

[Petr Jelinek]

On 01/05/15 15:17, Bruce Momjian wrote:

On Fri, May  1, 2015 at 03:13:28PM +0200, Petr Jelinek wrote:

On 01/05/15 15:01, Bruce Momjian wrote:

On Fri, May  1, 2015 at 05:25:53AM +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote:

It is done


Uh, I am not sure why you say that as I don't see any commit related to
this.  Can you show me the commit?



865f14a2d31af23a05bbf2df04c274629c5d5c4d


But that doesn't touch these:

1. funcname_signature_string
2. get_rule_expr

which is what Robert's later patch did:


http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/ca+tgmobcmf7f50+fejpclr8e_lyv45ayxbsdiog-ns7vluf...@mail.gmail.com



Oh, now I see what you mean, yeah that does not appear to have been 
committed.


--
 Petr Jelinek  http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services


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

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: disallow operator "=>" and use it for named parameters

[Bruce Momjian]

On Fri, May  1, 2015 at 03:13:28PM +0200, Petr Jelinek wrote:
> On 01/05/15 15:01, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >On Fri, May  1, 2015 at 05:25:53AM +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> >>It is done
> >
> >Uh, I am not sure why you say that as I don't see any commit related to
> >this.  Can you show me the commit?
> >
> 
> 865f14a2d31af23a05bbf2df04c274629c5d5c4d

But that doesn't touch these:

1. funcname_signature_string
2. get_rule_expr

which is what Robert's later patch did:


http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/ca+tgmobcmf7f50+fejpclr8e_lyv45ayxbsdiog-ns7vluf...@mail.gmail.com

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

  + Everyone has their own god. +


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

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: disallow operator "=>" and use it for named parameters

[Petr Jelinek]

On 01/05/15 15:01, Bruce Momjian wrote:

On Fri, May  1, 2015 at 05:25:53AM +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote:

It is done


Uh, I am not sure why you say that as I don't see any commit related to
this.  Can you show me the commit?



865f14a2d31af23a05bbf2df04c274629c5d5c4d


--
 Petr Jelinek  http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services


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

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: disallow operator "=>" and use it for named parameters

[Bruce Momjian]

On Fri, May  1, 2015 at 05:25:53AM +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> It is done

Uh, I am not sure why you say that as I don't see any commit related to
this.  Can you show me the commit?

---


> 
> Dne 1.5.2015 3:11 napsal uživatel "Bruce Momjian" :
> 
> On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 02:51:30PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 2:32 PM, Pavel Stehule 
> wrote:
> > > 1. funcname_signature_string
> > > 2. get_rule_expr
> >
> > Thanks.  Patch attached.  I'll commit this if there are no objections.
> 
> Robert, are you going to apply this?
> 
> --
>   Bruce Momjian          http://momjian.us
>   EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com
> 
>   + Everyone has their own god. +
> 

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

  + Everyone has their own god. +


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

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: disallow operator "=>" and use it for named parameters

[Pavel Stehule]

It is done
Dne 1.5.2015 3:11 napsal uživatel "Bruce Momjian" :

> On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 02:51:30PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 2:32 PM, Pavel Stehule 
> wrote:
> > > 1. funcname_signature_string
> > > 2. get_rule_expr
> >
> > Thanks.  Patch attached.  I'll commit this if there are no objections.
>
> Robert, are you going to apply this?
>
> --
>   Bruce Momjian  http://momjian.us
>   EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
>
>   + Everyone has their own god. +
>

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: disallow operator "=>" and use it for named parameters

[Bruce Momjian]

On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 02:51:30PM -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 2:32 PM, Pavel Stehule  
> wrote:
> > 1. funcname_signature_string
> > 2. get_rule_expr
> 
> Thanks.  Patch attached.  I'll commit this if there are no objections.

Robert, are you going to apply this?

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

  + Everyone has their own god. +


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

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: disallow operator "=>" and use it for named parameters

[Tom Lane]

Kevin Grittner  writes:
> Tom Lane  wrote:
>> Presumably we are going to change it at some point; maybe we
>> should just do it rather than waiting another 5 years.

> +1

> It has been deprecated long enough that I don't see the point of waiting.

Uh, just to clarify, this has nothing to do with how long the operator has
been deprecated.  The issue is whether pg_dump should dump a function-call
syntax that will not be recognized by any pre-9.5 release, when there is
an alternative that will be recognized back to 9.0.

BTW, I just noticed another place that probably should be changed:

regression=# select foo(x => 1);
ERROR:  42883: function foo(x := integer) does not exist
LINE 1: select foo(x => 1);
   ^
HINT:  No function matches the given name and argument types. You might need to 
add explicit type casts.
LOCATION:  ParseFuncOrColumn, parse_func.c:516

regards, tom lane


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

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: disallow operator "=>" and use it for named parameters

[Kevin Grittner]

Tom Lane  wrote:
> Robert Haas  writes:
>> On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 11:50 AM, Tom Lane  wrote:
>>> Was there any consideration given to whether ruleutils should start
>>> printing NamedArgExprs with "=>"?  Or do we think that needs to wait?
>>
>> I have to admit that I didn't consider that.  What do you think?  I
>> guess I'd be tentatively in favor of changing that to match, but I
>> could be convinced otherwise.

> Presumably we are going to change it at some point; maybe we
> should just do it rather than waiting another 5 years.

+1

It has been deprecated long enough that I don't see the point of waiting.

--
Kevin Grittner
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company


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

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: disallow operator "=>" and use it for named parameters

[Pavel Stehule]

2015-03-10 17:07 GMT+01:00 Petr Jelinek :

> On 10/03/15 17:01, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> 2015-03-10 16:50 GMT+01:00 Tom Lane > >:
>>
>> Robert Haas mailto:robertmh...@gmail.com>>
>> writes:
>>
>> > Committed with a few documentation tweaks.
>>
>> Was there any consideration given to whether ruleutils should start
>> printing NamedArgExprs with "=>"?  Or do we think that needs to wait?
>>
>>
>> I didn't think about it? I don't see any reason why it have to use
>> deprecated syntax.
>>
>>
> There is one, loading the output into older version of Postgres. Don't
> know if that's important one though.


I don't think so it is a hard issue. We doesn't support downgrades - and if
somebody needs it, it can fix it with some regexp. We should to use
preferred syntax everywhere - and preferred syntax should be ANSI.

I forgot it :(

Pavel


>
>
> --
>  Petr Jelinek  http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
>  PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
>

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: disallow operator "=>" and use it for named parameters

[Robert Haas]

On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 2:32 PM, Pavel Stehule  wrote:
> 1. funcname_signature_string
> 2. get_rule_expr

Thanks.  Patch attached.  I'll commit this if there are no objections.

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


named-expr-fixes.patch
Description: binary/octet-stream

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

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: disallow operator "=>" and use it for named parameters

[Pavel Stehule]

2015-03-10 19:02 GMT+01:00 Tom Lane :

> Kevin Grittner  writes:
> > Tom Lane  wrote:
> >> Presumably we are going to change it at some point; maybe we
> >> should just do it rather than waiting another 5 years.
>
> > +1
>
> > It has been deprecated long enough that I don't see the point of waiting.
>
> Uh, just to clarify, this has nothing to do with how long the operator has
> been deprecated.  The issue is whether pg_dump should dump a function-call
> syntax that will not be recognized by any pre-9.5 release, when there is
> an alternative that will be recognized back to 9.0.
>
> BTW, I just noticed another place that probably should be changed:
>
> regression=# select foo(x => 1);
> ERROR:  42883: function foo(x := integer) does not exist
> LINE 1: select foo(x => 1);
>^
> HINT:  No function matches the given name and argument types. You might
> need to add explicit type casts.
> LOCATION:  ParseFuncOrColumn, parse_func.c:516
>

1. funcname_signature_string
2. get_rule_expr





>
> regards, tom lane
>

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: disallow operator "=>" and use it for named parameters

[Tom Lane]

Robert Haas  writes:
> On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 11:50 AM, Tom Lane  wrote:
>> Was there any consideration given to whether ruleutils should start
>> printing NamedArgExprs with "=>"?  Or do we think that needs to wait?

> I have to admit that I didn't consider that.  What do you think?  I
> guess I'd be tentatively in favor of changing that to match, but I
> could be convinced otherwise.

Well, as said upthread, the argument for not changing would be that it
would make it easier to dump views and reload them into older PG versions.
I'm not sure how big a consideration that is, or whether it outweighs
possible cross-DBMS compatibility benefits of dumping the more standard
syntax.  Presumably we are going to change it at some point; maybe we
should just do it rather than waiting another 5 years.

IOW, I guess I lean mildly towards changing, but I've been beaten up
enough lately about backwards-compatibility worries that I'm not going
to fight for changing this.

regards, tom lane


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

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: disallow operator "=>" and use it for named parameters

[Robert Haas]

On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 11:50 AM, Tom Lane  wrote:
> Robert Haas  writes:
>> On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 3:15 PM, Pavel Stehule  
>> wrote:
>>> I am marking this as Ready For Committer, the patch is trivial and works
>>> as expected, there is nothing to be added to it IMHO.
>>>
>>> The "=>" operator was deprecated for several years so it should not be too
>>> controversial either.
>
>> Committed with a few documentation tweaks.
>
> Was there any consideration given to whether ruleutils should start
> printing NamedArgExprs with "=>"?  Or do we think that needs to wait?

I have to admit that I didn't consider that.  What do you think?  I
guess I'd be tentatively in favor of changing that to match, but I
could be convinced otherwise.

-- 
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:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: disallow operator "=>" and use it for named parameters

[Petr Jelinek]

On 10/03/15 17:01, Pavel Stehule wrote:



2015-03-10 16:50 GMT+01:00 Tom Lane mailto:t...@sss.pgh.pa.us>>:

Robert Haas mailto:robertmh...@gmail.com>>
writes:

> Committed with a few documentation tweaks.

Was there any consideration given to whether ruleutils should start
printing NamedArgExprs with "=>"?  Or do we think that needs to wait?


I didn't think about it? I don't see any reason why it have to use
deprecated syntax.



There is one, loading the output into older version of Postgres. Don't 
know if that's important one though.


--
 Petr Jelinek  http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services


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

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: disallow operator "=>" and use it for named parameters

[Pavel Stehule]

2015-03-10 16:50 GMT+01:00 Tom Lane :

> Robert Haas  writes:
> > On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 3:15 PM, Pavel Stehule 
> wrote:
> >> I am marking this as Ready For Committer, the patch is trivial and works
> >> as expected, there is nothing to be added to it IMHO.
> >>
> >> The "=>" operator was deprecated for several years so it should not be
> too
> >> controversial either.
>
> > Committed with a few documentation tweaks.
>
> Was there any consideration given to whether ruleutils should start
> printing NamedArgExprs with "=>"?  Or do we think that needs to wait?
>

I didn't think about it? I don't see any reason why it have to use
deprecated syntax.

Regards

Pavel


>
> regards, tom lane
>

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: disallow operator "=>" and use it for named parameters

[Tom Lane]

Robert Haas  writes:
> On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 3:15 PM, Pavel Stehule  
> wrote:
>> I am marking this as Ready For Committer, the patch is trivial and works
>> as expected, there is nothing to be added to it IMHO.
>> 
>> The "=>" operator was deprecated for several years so it should not be too
>> controversial either.

> Committed with a few documentation tweaks.

Was there any consideration given to whether ruleutils should start
printing NamedArgExprs with "=>"?  Or do we think that needs to wait?

regards, tom lane


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

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: disallow operator "=>" and use it for named parameters

[Robert Haas]

On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 3:15 PM, Pavel Stehule  wrote:
>> I am marking this as Ready For Committer, the patch is trivial and works
>> as expected, there is nothing to be added to it IMHO.
>>
>> The "=>" operator was deprecated for several years so it should not be too
>> controversial either.

Committed with a few documentation tweaks.

-- 
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:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: disallow operator "=>" and use it for named parameters

[Pavel Stehule]

2015-02-19 16:06 GMT+01:00 Petr Jelinek :

> On 19/01/15 17:14, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> 2015-01-19 14:27 GMT+01:00 Robert Haas > >:
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 2:59 AM, Pavel Stehule
>> mailto:pavel.steh...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> >> I think you should just remove the WARNING, not change it to an
>> error.
>> >> If somebody wants to quote the operator name to be able to continue
>> >> using it, I think that's OK.
>> >
>> > It looks so quoting doesn't help here
>> >
>> > + CREATE OPERATOR "=>" (
>> > +leftarg = int8,<--><-->-- right unary
>> > +procedure = numeric_fac
>> > + );
>> > + ERROR:  syntax error at or near "("
>> > + LINE 1: CREATE OPERATOR "=>" (
>> > +  ^
>>
>> Well then the error check is just dead code.  Either way, you don't
>> need it.
>>
>>
>> yes, I removed it
>>
>>
> I am marking this as Ready For Committer, the patch is trivial and works
> as expected, there is nothing to be added to it IMHO.
>
> The "=>" operator was deprecated for several years so it should not be too
> controversial either.
>

Thank you very much

Pavel


>
>
> --
>  Petr Jelinek  http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
>  PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
>

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: disallow operator "=>" and use it for named parameters

[Petr Jelinek]

On 19/01/15 17:14, Pavel Stehule wrote:



2015-01-19 14:27 GMT+01:00 Robert Haas mailto:robertmh...@gmail.com>>:

On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 2:59 AM, Pavel Stehule
mailto:pavel.steh...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> I think you should just remove the WARNING, not change it to an error.
>> If somebody wants to quote the operator name to be able to continue
>> using it, I think that's OK.
>
> It looks so quoting doesn't help here
>
> + CREATE OPERATOR "=>" (
> +leftarg = int8,<--><-->-- right unary
> +procedure = numeric_fac
> + );
> + ERROR:  syntax error at or near "("
> + LINE 1: CREATE OPERATOR "=>" (
> +  ^

Well then the error check is just dead code.  Either way, you don't
need it.


yes, I removed it



I am marking this as Ready For Committer, the patch is trivial and works 
as expected, there is nothing to be added to it IMHO.


The "=>" operator was deprecated for several years so it should not be 
too controversial either.



--
 Petr Jelinek  http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
 PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services


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

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: disallow operator "=>" and use it for named parameters

[Pavel Stehule]

2015-01-19 14:27 GMT+01:00 Robert Haas :

> On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 2:59 AM, Pavel Stehule 
> wrote:
> >> I think you should just remove the WARNING, not change it to an error.
> >> If somebody wants to quote the operator name to be able to continue
> >> using it, I think that's OK.
> >
> > It looks so quoting doesn't help here
> >
> > + CREATE OPERATOR "=>" (
> > +leftarg = int8,<--><-->-- right unary
> > +procedure = numeric_fac
> > + );
> > + ERROR:  syntax error at or near "("
> > + LINE 1: CREATE OPERATOR "=>" (
> > +  ^
>
> Well then the error check is just dead code.  Either way, you don't need
> it.
>

yes, I removed it

Regards

Pavel


>
> --
> Robert Haas
> EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
>
diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/func.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/func.sgml
new file mode 100644
index 5e7b000..c33190e
*** a/doc/src/sgml/func.sgml
--- b/doc/src/sgml/func.sgml
*** SELECT SUBSTRING('XY1234Z', 'Y*?([0-9]{1
*** 6785,6791 
   Create interval from years, months, weeks, days, hours, minutes and
   seconds fields
  
! make_interval(days := 10)
  10 days
 
  
--- 6785,6791 
   Create interval from years, months, weeks, days, hours, minutes and
   seconds fields
  
! make_interval(days => 10)
  10 days
 
  
diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/syntax.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/syntax.sgml
new file mode 100644
index 4b81b08..d30db6a
*** a/doc/src/sgml/syntax.sgml
--- b/doc/src/sgml/syntax.sgml
*** SELECT concat_lower_or_upper('Hello', 'W
*** 2599,2605 
   := to separate it from the argument expression.
   For example:
  
! SELECT concat_lower_or_upper(a := 'Hello', b := 'World');
   concat_lower_or_upper 
  ---
   hello world
--- 2599,2605 
   := to separate it from the argument expression.
   For example:
  
! SELECT concat_lower_or_upper(a => 'Hello', b => 'World');
   concat_lower_or_upper 
  ---
   hello world
*** SELECT concat_lower_or_upper(a := 'Hello
*** 2610,2622 
   using named notation is that the arguments may be specified in any
   order, for example:
  
! SELECT concat_lower_or_upper(a := 'Hello', b := 'World', uppercase := true);
   concat_lower_or_upper 
  ---
   HELLO WORLD
  (1 row)
  
! SELECT concat_lower_or_upper(a := 'Hello', uppercase := true, b := 'World');
   concat_lower_or_upper 
  ---
   HELLO WORLD
--- 2610,2633 
   using named notation is that the arguments may be specified in any
   order, for example:
  
! SELECT concat_lower_or_upper(a => 'Hello', b => 'World', uppercase => true);
   concat_lower_or_upper 
  ---
   HELLO WORLD
  (1 row)
  
! SELECT concat_lower_or_upper(a => 'Hello', uppercase => true, b => 'World');
!  concat_lower_or_upper 
! ---
!  HELLO WORLD
! (1 row)
! 
! 
! 
! 
!   Older syntax based on ":=" symbol is still supported:
! 
! SELECT concat_lower_or_upper(a := 'Hello', uppercase := true, b := 'World');
   concat_lower_or_upper 
  ---
   HELLO WORLD
*** SELECT concat_lower_or_upper(a := 'Hello
*** 2638,2644 
  already mentioned, named arguments cannot precede positional arguments.
  For example:
  
! SELECT concat_lower_or_upper('Hello', 'World', uppercase := true);
   concat_lower_or_upper 
  ---
   HELLO WORLD
--- 2649,2655 
  already mentioned, named arguments cannot precede positional arguments.
  For example:
  
! SELECT concat_lower_or_upper('Hello', 'World', uppercase => true);
   concat_lower_or_upper 
  ---
   HELLO WORLD
diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/xfunc.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/xfunc.sgml
new file mode 100644
index f40504c..264e5ff
*** a/doc/src/sgml/xfunc.sgml
--- b/doc/src/sgml/xfunc.sgml
*** SELECT mleast(VARIADIC ARRAY[]::numeric[
*** 776,789 
   VARIADIC.  For example, this will work:
  
  
! SELECT mleast(VARIADIC arr := ARRAY[10, -1, 5, 4.4]);
  
  
   but not these:
  
  
! SELECT mleast(arr := 10);
! SELECT mleast(arr := ARRAY[10, -1, 5, 4.4]);
  
  
 
--- 776,789 
   VARIADIC.  For example, this will work:
  
  
! SELECT mleast(VARIADIC arr => ARRAY[10, -1, 5, 4.4]);
  
  
   but not these:
  
  
! SELECT mleast(arr => 10);
! SELECT mleast(arr => ARRAY[10, -1, 5, 4.4]);
  
  
 
diff --git a/src/backend/commands/operatorcmds.c b/src/backend/commands/operatorcmds.c
new file mode 100644
index 2996019..e4327c2
*** a/src/backend/commands/operatorcmds.c
--- b/src/backend/commands/operatorcmds.c
*** DefineOperator(List *names, List *parame
*** 87,102 
  	/* Convert list of names to a name and namespace */
  	oprNamespace = QualifiedNameGetCreationNamespace(names, &oprName);
  
- 	/*
- 	 * The SQL standard commit

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: disallow operator "=>" and use it for named parameters

[Pavel Stehule]

2015-01-19 14:30 GMT+01:00 Alvaro Herrera :

> Pavel Stehule wrote:
>
> > It looks so quoting doesn't help here
> >
> > + CREATE OPERATOR "=>" (
> > +leftarg = int8,<--><-->-- right unary
> > +procedure = numeric_fac
> > + );
> > + ERROR:  syntax error at or near "("
> > + LINE 1: CREATE OPERATOR "=>" (
> > +  ^
>
> Does it work to use OPERATOR(=>) syntax?  I don't think identifier
> quoting works for operators.
>

it doesn't work too



>
> --
> Álvaro Herrerahttp://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
> PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
>

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: disallow operator "=>" and use it for named parameters

[Alvaro Herrera]

Pavel Stehule wrote:

> It looks so quoting doesn't help here
> 
> + CREATE OPERATOR "=>" (
> +leftarg = int8,<--><-->-- right unary
> +procedure = numeric_fac
> + );
> + ERROR:  syntax error at or near "("
> + LINE 1: CREATE OPERATOR "=>" (
> +  ^

Does it work to use OPERATOR(=>) syntax?  I don't think identifier
quoting works for operators.

-- 
Álvaro Herrerahttp://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services


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

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: disallow operator "=>" and use it for named parameters

[Robert Haas]

On Mon, Jan 19, 2015 at 2:59 AM, Pavel Stehule  wrote:
>> I think you should just remove the WARNING, not change it to an error.
>> If somebody wants to quote the operator name to be able to continue
>> using it, I think that's OK.
>
> It looks so quoting doesn't help here
>
> + CREATE OPERATOR "=>" (
> +leftarg = int8,<--><-->-- right unary
> +procedure = numeric_fac
> + );
> + ERROR:  syntax error at or near "("
> + LINE 1: CREATE OPERATOR "=>" (
> +  ^

Well then the error check is just dead code.  Either way, you don't need it.

-- 
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:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: disallow operator "=>" and use it for named parameters

[Pavel Stehule]

2015-01-19 4:54 GMT+01:00 Robert Haas :

> On Sat, Jan 17, 2015 at 8:27 PM, Pavel Stehule 
> wrote:
> > two years a operator "=>" is marked as deprecated (from PostgreSQL 9.2).
> >
> > Isn't time to use it for named parameters now (for PostgreSQL 9.5) ?
>
> I'm cool with that.  It's possible that there are installations out
> there that still have => operators installed, but every
> still-supported release warns you not to do that, and the hstore
> change exists in three released versions.  Anyway, no amount of
> waiting will eliminate the hazard completely.
>
> > I am sending a implementation where syntax based on "=>" symbol is second
> > (but preferred) variant of ":=" syntax .. syntax ":=" will be supported
> > still.
> >
> > Here is a patch
>
> I think you should just remove the WARNING, not change it to an error.
> If somebody wants to quote the operator name to be able to continue
> using it, I think that's OK.
>

It looks so quoting doesn't help here

+ CREATE OPERATOR "=>" (
+leftarg = int8,<--><-->-- right unary
+procedure = numeric_fac
+ );
+ ERROR:  syntax error at or near "("
+ LINE 1: CREATE OPERATOR "=>" (
+  ^

Regards

Pavel


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

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: disallow operator "=>" and use it for named parameters

[Pavel Stehule]

2015-01-19 4:54 GMT+01:00 Robert Haas :

> On Sat, Jan 17, 2015 at 8:27 PM, Pavel Stehule 
> wrote:
> > two years a operator "=>" is marked as deprecated (from PostgreSQL 9.2).
> >
> > Isn't time to use it for named parameters now (for PostgreSQL 9.5) ?
>
> I'm cool with that.  It's possible that there are installations out
> there that still have => operators installed, but every
> still-supported release warns you not to do that, and the hstore
> change exists in three released versions.  Anyway, no amount of
> waiting will eliminate the hazard completely.
>
> > I am sending a implementation where syntax based on "=>" symbol is second
> > (but preferred) variant of ":=" syntax .. syntax ":=" will be supported
> > still.
> >
> > Here is a patch
>
> I think you should just remove the WARNING, not change it to an error.
> If somebody wants to quote the operator name to be able to continue
> using it, I think that's OK.
>

I have no problem with it. Just I'll try if there are no some unexpected
problem and I'll send a updated patch

Regards

Pavel


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

Re: [HACKERS] proposal: disallow operator "=>" and use it for named parameters

[Robert Haas]

On Sat, Jan 17, 2015 at 8:27 PM, Pavel Stehule  wrote:
> two years a operator "=>" is marked as deprecated (from PostgreSQL 9.2).
>
> Isn't time to use it for named parameters now (for PostgreSQL 9.5) ?

I'm cool with that.  It's possible that there are installations out
there that still have => operators installed, but every
still-supported release warns you not to do that, and the hstore
change exists in three released versions.  Anyway, no amount of
waiting will eliminate the hazard completely.

> I am sending a implementation where syntax based on "=>" symbol is second
> (but preferred) variant of ":=" syntax .. syntax ":=" will be supported
> still.
>
> Here is a patch

I think you should just remove the WARNING, not change it to an error.
If somebody wants to quote the operator name to be able to continue
using it, I think that's OK.

-- 
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:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers

[HACKERS] proposal: disallow operator "=>" and use it for named parameters

[Pavel Stehule]

Hello

two years a operator "=>" is marked as deprecated (from PostgreSQL 9.2).

Isn't time to use it for named parameters now (for PostgreSQL 9.5) ?

I am sending a implementation where syntax based on "=>" symbol is second
(but preferred) variant of ":=" syntax .. syntax ":=" will be supported
still.

Here is a patch

comments, notices?

Regards

Pavel
commit 857c079d6b8030c575da129bb142860e8f6f951e
Author: Pavel Stehule 
Date:   Sun Jan 18 02:25:48 2015 +0100

initial implementation

diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/func.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/func.sgml
index 5e7b000..c33190e 100644
--- a/doc/src/sgml/func.sgml
+++ b/doc/src/sgml/func.sgml
@@ -6785,7 +6785,7 @@ SELECT SUBSTRING('XY1234Z', 'Y*?([0-9]{1,3})');
  Create interval from years, months, weeks, days, hours, minutes and
  seconds fields
 
-make_interval(days := 10)
+make_interval(days => 10)
 10 days

 
diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/syntax.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/syntax.sgml
index 4b81b08..d30db6a 100644
--- a/doc/src/sgml/syntax.sgml
+++ b/doc/src/sgml/syntax.sgml
@@ -2599,7 +2599,7 @@ SELECT concat_lower_or_upper('Hello', 'World');
  := to separate it from the argument expression.
  For example:
 
-SELECT concat_lower_or_upper(a := 'Hello', b := 'World');
+SELECT concat_lower_or_upper(a => 'Hello', b => 'World');
  concat_lower_or_upper 
 ---
  hello world
@@ -2610,13 +2610,24 @@ SELECT concat_lower_or_upper(a := 'Hello', b := 'World');
  using named notation is that the arguments may be specified in any
  order, for example:
 
-SELECT concat_lower_or_upper(a := 'Hello', b := 'World', uppercase := true);
+SELECT concat_lower_or_upper(a => 'Hello', b => 'World', uppercase => true);
  concat_lower_or_upper 
 ---
  HELLO WORLD
 (1 row)
 
-SELECT concat_lower_or_upper(a := 'Hello', uppercase := true, b := 'World');
+SELECT concat_lower_or_upper(a => 'Hello', uppercase => true, b => 'World');
+ concat_lower_or_upper 
+---
+ HELLO WORLD
+(1 row)
+
+
+
+
+  Older syntax based on ":=" symbol is still supported:
+
+SELECT concat_lower_or_upper(a := 'Hello', uppercase := true, b := 'World');
  concat_lower_or_upper 
 ---
  HELLO WORLD
@@ -2638,7 +2649,7 @@ SELECT concat_lower_or_upper(a := 'Hello', uppercase := true, b := 'World');
 already mentioned, named arguments cannot precede positional arguments.
 For example:
 
-SELECT concat_lower_or_upper('Hello', 'World', uppercase := true);
+SELECT concat_lower_or_upper('Hello', 'World', uppercase => true);
  concat_lower_or_upper 
 ---
  HELLO WORLD
diff --git a/doc/src/sgml/xfunc.sgml b/doc/src/sgml/xfunc.sgml
index f40504c..264e5ff 100644
--- a/doc/src/sgml/xfunc.sgml
+++ b/doc/src/sgml/xfunc.sgml
@@ -776,14 +776,14 @@ SELECT mleast(VARIADIC ARRAY[]::numeric[]);
  VARIADIC.  For example, this will work:
 
 
-SELECT mleast(VARIADIC arr := ARRAY[10, -1, 5, 4.4]);
+SELECT mleast(VARIADIC arr => ARRAY[10, -1, 5, 4.4]);
 
 
  but not these:
 
 
-SELECT mleast(arr := 10);
-SELECT mleast(arr := ARRAY[10, -1, 5, 4.4]);
+SELECT mleast(arr => 10);
+SELECT mleast(arr => ARRAY[10, -1, 5, 4.4]);
 
 

diff --git a/src/backend/commands/operatorcmds.c b/src/backend/commands/operatorcmds.c
index 2996019..2d26345 100644
--- a/src/backend/commands/operatorcmds.c
+++ b/src/backend/commands/operatorcmds.c
@@ -93,9 +93,8 @@ DefineOperator(List *names, List *parameters)
 	 * as the name of a user-defined operator.
 	 */
 	if (strcmp(oprName, "=>") == 0)
-		ereport(WARNING,
-(errmsg("=> is deprecated as an operator name"),
- errdetail("This name may be disallowed altogether in future versions of PostgreSQL.")));
+		ereport(ERROR,
+(errmsg("=> is disallowed as an operator name")));
 
 	/* Check we have creation rights in target namespace */
 	aclresult = pg_namespace_aclcheck(oprNamespace, GetUserId(), ACL_CREATE);
diff --git a/src/backend/parser/gram.y b/src/backend/parser/gram.y
index 36dac29..6a02dcc 100644
--- a/src/backend/parser/gram.y
+++ b/src/backend/parser/gram.y
@@ -531,7 +531,7 @@ static Node *makeRecursiveViewSelect(char *relname, List *aliases, Node *query);
  */
 %token 	IDENT FCONST SCONST BCONST XCONST Op
 %token 	ICONST PARAM
-%token			TYPECAST DOT_DOT COLON_EQUALS
+%token			TYPECAST DOT_DOT COLON_EQUALS EQUALS_GREATER
 
 /*
  * If you want to make any keyword changes, update the keyword table in
@@ -12557,6 +12557,15 @@ func_arg_expr:  a_expr
 	na->location = @1;
 	$$ = (Node *) na;
 }
+			| param_name EQUALS_GREATER a_expr
+{
+	NamedArgExpr *na = makeNode(NamedArgExpr);
+	na->name = $1;
+	na->arg = (Expr *) $3;
+	na->argnumber = -1;		/* until determined */
+	na->location = @1;
+	$$ = (Node *) na;
+}
 		;
 
 type_list:	Typename{ $$ = list_make1($1); }
diff --git a/src/backend/parser/scan.l b/src/backend/parser/scan.l
index 21a6f30..743df71 100644
--- a/sr