Re: function_name.parameter_name

Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Excerpts from Darren Duncan's message of mié sep 08 18:29:35 -0400 2010:
> 
>> Personally I like the idea of developers not always having to be forced to 
>> choose among two equally good names, and making a wrapper function would be 
>> overkill for this feature.
> 
> While I don't agree with the idea of providing extra names that are
> probably mostly going to increase the confusion of someone trying to
> understand such a system, I think this use case would be well covered by
> synonyms.  But these would be defined by a new SQL command, say CREATE
> SYNONYM, not by funny notation on the initial CREATE FUNCTION call.

Yes, and having a more general solution like CREATE SYNONYM is more important to 
have anyway.  My "|" is simply a syntactic shorthand for a special case of 
CREATE SYNONYM, with respect to schema objects, and would parse into the same 
thing.  I don't feel any need now for me to push this shorthand further. -- 
Darren Duncan