Re: WIP: default values for function parameters
От | Rod Taylor |
---|---|
Тема | Re: WIP: default values for function parameters |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 751261b20812120600o3a1f8280j2c5425fa95ab36e7@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: WIP: default values for function parameters ("Pavel Stehule" <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: WIP: default values for function parameters
Re: WIP: default values for function parameters |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
How about IS or INTO? param_name IS 3 param_name IS 'some string value' 3 INTO param_name 'some string value' INTO param_name On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 8:47 AM, Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> wrote: > 2008/12/12 David E. Wheeler <david@kineticode.com>: >> On Dec 12, 2008, at 2:39 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> >>> So I think that really this is never going to fly unless it uses a >>> keyword-looking reserved word. And we're not going to take some short >>> word that's not reserved now and suddenly make it so. So, despite >>> Pavel's objection that the AS syntax proposal might be confused with >>> other uses of AS, I seriously doubt that any proposal is going to get >>> accepted that doesn't recycle AS or some other existing reserved word. > > when I should exactly identify param name, the we should to use any symbols. > >> >> I'm okay with AS if that's the way it has to be, but what about a colon >> right at the end of the label? A cast is two colons, so no conflict there: >> >> SELECT foo(1, name: 'bar', quantity: 10); > > it's look well, but I still prefer some combination with = > > name: = '' > name: => ''' > :name = '' > $name => .. > $name = .. > > Maybe I am too conservative > Pavel > >> >> No doubt I'm missing something… >> >> Best >> >> David > > -- > Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers >
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: