Re: PL/pgSQL 2

On 9/3/14 5:05 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Wed, Sep  3, 2014 at 07:54:09AM +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>> I am not against to improve a PL/pgSQL. And I repeat, what can be done and can
>> be done early:
>>
>> a) ASSERT clause -- with some other modification to allow better static analyze
>> of DML statements, and enforces checks in runtime.
>>
>> b) #option or PRAGMA clause with GUC with function scope that enforce check on
>> processed rows after any DML statement
>>
>> c) maybe introduction automatic variable ROW_COUNT as shortcut for GET
>> DIAGNOSTICS rc = ROW_COUNT
>
> All these ideas are being captured somewhere, right?  Where?

I'm working on a wiki page with all these ideas.  Some of them break 
backwards compatibility somewhat blatantly, some of them could be added 
into PL/PgSQL if we're okay with reserving a keyword for the feature. 
All of them we think are necessary.


.marko