Re: OO Patch
От | Chris Bitmead |
---|---|
Тема | Re: OO Patch |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 39291A66.3D78756@bitmead.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | OO Patch (Chris <chris@bitmead.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > On Sun, 21 May 2000, Hannu Krosing wrote: > > > > Now a question in particular. I understand that this syntax might > > > give me some rows (a, b, c) and others (a, b, c, d, e) and perhaps others > > > (a, b, c, f, g, h). Now what would be the syntax for getting only (b, c), > > > (b, c, e) and (b, c, h)? > > > > What would you need that for ? > > Gee, lemme think. Why do we have SELECT a, b, c at all? Why doesn't > everyone just use SELECT * and filter the stuff themselves? What if I want > to apply a function on `h' but not on the others? Don't tell me there's no > syntax for that, only for getting all columns. (And the fact that your > proposed syntaxes seem completely ad hoc and home-brewed doesn't make me > feel better.) Oh, now I understand what you asking. Yes I did suggest that you be allowed to specify sub-class attributes that don't occur in the super-class. The syntax would be the obvious - either attrname, or class.attrname. As far as syntax is concerned I don't think I'm welded to anything in particular, so suggestions are welcome.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: