| From: | Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Joel Jacobson <joel(at)trustly(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: PL/pgSQL 2 |
| Date: | 2014-09-01 15:16:17 |
| Message-ID: | 54048DC1.3030103@2ndquadrant.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 09/01/2014 10:41 PM, Joel Jacobson wrote:
> This is exactly why we need a new language.
> All the clumsy stuff we cannot fix in plpgsql, can easily be fixed in
> plpgsql2, with the most beautiful syntax we can come up with.
>
> I guess it's a question if we want to support things like this. If we
> want to, then we also want a new language.
Given how much bike shedding occurs around trivial features, can you
imagine how long that'd take?
--
Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joel Jacobson | 2014-09-01 15:19:39 | Re: PL/pgSQL 2 |
| Previous Message | Joel Jacobson | 2014-09-01 14:59:53 | Re: PL/pgSQL 2 |