Re: functional call named notation clashes with SQL feature
| От | Pavel Stehule |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: functional call named notation clashes with SQL feature |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | AANLkTin3j9-fXv3TTG-B0bIlxcsYv2B8gOq-uy9Z-8fg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: functional call named notation clashes with SQL feature (Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: functional call named notation clashes with SQL feature
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
2010/5/27 Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>: > On 27/05/10 09:50, Pavel Stehule wrote: >> >> 2010/5/27 Heikki Linnakangas<heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>: >>> >>> AFAIU, the standard doesn't say anything about named parameters. Oracle >>> uses >>> =>, but as you said, that's ambiguous with the => operator. >>> >>> +1 for FOR. >> >> I don't see any advantage of "FOR". > > Any advantage over AS? It doesn't clash with the "foo AS bar" syntax that > the standard is using for something completely different, as Peter pointed > out in the original post. No, standard knows "AS" in different context. In param list standard doesn't use keyword "AS". > >> We can change ir to support new standard or don't change it. > > What new standard? > ANSI SQL 2011 Pavel > -- > Heikki Linnakangas > EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com >
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: