From: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: info about patch: using parametrised query in psql |
Date: | 2009-12-25 18:54:27 |
Message-ID: | 162867790912251054u4a5c2032q9b6c3626a580db23@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
2009/12/25 Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>:
> Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> there are two quoting styles, so we need two syntax. I proposed
>
>> :[var] and :{var} - for ident quoting and literal quoting.
>> Theoretically we could to use :(var) for bytea escaping.
>
> And if you need a fourth style, you're at a dead end. I don't think
> this is really an improvement over the single-flag-character approach.
> Neither one has got any mnemonic value whatever, unfortunately, but
> at least the flag character method is fairly extensible.
I thing so not.
what:
:'variable'
:"variable"
we could to use any non identifier char without ":"
for me - flag characters looks little bit strange - maybe I have a
quoting joined with some symmetric. Maybe it looks too much like unary
operator
Regards
Pavel
>
> regards, tom lane
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2009-12-25 18:57:01 | Re: ORDER BY clause in aggregate doesn't work well with multi argument aggregates |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-12-25 18:43:52 | Re: ORDER BY clause in aggregate doesn't work well with multi argument aggregates |