From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: functional call named notation clashes with SQL feature |
Date: | 2010-06-03 15:44:37 |
Message-ID: | 201006031544.o53FibW25806@momjian.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> > > Are we sure we want hstore compatibility to drive this decision?
> >
> > hstore is what it is, and has been that way for a long time. We can't
> > just ignore it. And I don't think breaking it (and probably other code)
> > on zero notice is an acceptable outcome.
>
> Well, it seems we are going to be stuck supporting => because it is hard
> to argue that the SQL standards committee should adopt := instead of =>
> because of hstore. ;-)
>
> I hate eventually having two documented ways of doing something, but it
> appears by releasing := we are doing exactly that.
>
> Is telling hstore users they have to change => to something else such a
> large major version incompatibility that it is worth supporting and
> documenting two syntaxes for parameter assignment? It is that calculus
> that has me questioning our approach.
Thinking some more, what is the value of keeping => in hstore for 9.0?
Perhaps we could create a script they could run on 8.4 that would add
support for the new hstore operator to replace =>, and then they can
upgrade to 9.0 when they are ready. I see only three mentions of => in
hstore.sql. Do we really want to keep the := baggage forever just for
hstore?
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ None of us is going to be here forever. +
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2010-06-03 15:46:20 | Re: How to pass around collation information |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2010-06-03 15:44:17 | Re: functional call named notation clashes with SQL feature |