Re: PL/pgSQL proposal: using list of scalars in assign
От | Andrew Dunstan |
---|---|
Тема | Re: PL/pgSQL proposal: using list of scalars in assign |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 43AB3C78.6070206@dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: PL/pgSQL proposal: using list of scalars in assign stmts, fore and fors stmts (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote: >David Fetter <david@fetter.org> writes: > > >>How about: >><target2> := {row|record|variable|'[ROW](' comma separated list of scalar vars ')'} >>instead, where the ROW is optional? >> >> > >If we're going to do this at all (which I'm still agin), I think the ROW >keyword is important to minimize ambiguity. If you are allowed to start >a statement with just "(x, ..." then there will be way too many >situations where the parser gets confused by slightly bad input, >resulting in way-off-base syntax error reports. Or worse, no syntax >error, but a function that does something else than you expected. > >I know that ROW is optional in the bit of SQL syntax that this proposal >is based on, but that's only because the SQL spec says we have to, not >because it's a good idea. > > > > I see no virtue in this either. It strikes me as just more syntactic sugar, and unless I am misreading or out of date it would be another incompatibility with Oracle. I don't mind doing that, but I think it should be for a better reason than that it accords with someone's taste in syntactic style. I'd be somewhat more persuaded if Oracle did this. I also agree with Tom's comments about requiring ROW. As I observed regarding another syntax proposal, terseness is not always good, and redundancy is not always bad. cheers andrew
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: