Re: PL/PgSQL "bare" function calls
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: PL/PgSQL "bare" function calls |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3833.1095260748@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | PL/PgSQL "bare" function calls (Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: PL/PgSQL "bare" function calls
Re: PL/PgSQL "bare" function calls |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com> writes: > (3) The parser must distinguish between two cases when it sees an > unknown word (T_WORD) beginning a statement. The word could be the > beginning of a SQL statement (stmt_execsql in the grammar), such as: > UPDATE ...; > or the name of a function in a function call: > invoke_func(...); > The patch currently distinguishes between these cases by looking at the > next token -- if it is a left parenthesis, the patch assumes it is a > function call, otherwise it assumes it is a SQL statement. Is this the > best approach? That seems fairly unworkable. For example SELECT (2,3,4); is valid SQL. Also I'm not sure if you can extend this to cope with schema-qualified function names. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: