On 09/01/2014 10:41 PM, Joel Jacobson wrote:
> This is exactly why we need a new language.
> All the clumsy stuff we cannot fix in plpgsql, can easily be fixed in
> plpgsql2, with the most beautiful syntax we can come up with.
>
> I guess it's a question if we want to support things like this. If we
> want to, then we also want a new language.
Given how much bike shedding occurs around trivial features, can you
imagine how long that'd take?
-- Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services