Re: Making CASE error handling less surprising

Hi,

On 2020-07-23 13:42:08 -0700, Andres Freund wrote:
> On 2020-07-23 16:34:25 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> > > It doesn't seem like it'd be too hard to implement that, but that it'd
> > > probably be fairly bulky because we'd need to track more state across
> > > recursive expression_tree_mutator() calls.
> > 
> > It wouldn't be any harder than what I posted upthread; it would
> > just be a different flag getting passed down in the context struct
> > and getting tested in a different place.
> 
> Cool.

Hm. Would SQL function inlining be a problem? It looks like that just
substitutes parameters. Before calling
eval_const_expressions_mutator(). So we'd not know not to evaluate such
"pseudo constants".  And that'd probably be confusing, especially
because it's not exactly obvious when inlining happens.

Greetings,

Andres Freund