Re: PL/pgSQL 2

On 02/09/14 05:24, Craig Ringer wrote:

I couldn't disagree more.

If we were to implement anything, it'd be PL/PSM
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SQL/PSM). I'm sure it's as bizarre and
quirky as anything else the SQL committee has brought forth, but it's at
least a standard(ish) language.

    So we'd choose a bizarre and quirky language instead of anything better just because it's standard. I'm sure current and prospective users will surely prefer a bizarre and quirky language that is standard approved, rather than a modern, comfortable, easy-to-use, that is not embodied by the ISO. No doubt ^_^

Creating a new language when there are already many existing contenders
is absolutely nonsensical. Other than PL/PSM the only thing that'd make
any sense would be to *pick a suitable existing language* like Lua or
JavaScript and bless it as a supported, always-available, in-core
language runtime that's compiled in by default.

    That is in my opinion a way more sensible choice. To bless PL/JavaScript as an in-core language would be a very wise choice.

    Álvaro

--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers