Re: PL/pgSQL 2

From: Jan Wieck <jan(at)wi3ck(dot)info>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Neil Tiffin <neilt(at)neiltiffin(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PL/pgSQL 2
Date: 2014-09-02 21:20:00
Message-ID: 54063480.9010401@wi3ck.info
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 09/01/2014 09:06 PM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> On 09/01/2014 08:09 PM, Neil Tiffin wrote:
> The docs also tell you how to avoid having to do this, using dollar quoting.
>
>
>>
>> That should be enough alone to suggest postgreSQL start working on a modern, in core, fast, fully supported language. Of course PL/pgSQL works, but so did one-line 5k perl programs that nobody likes today. Everything can be done in assembler, but no one suggests that today. Today, it is all about programmer productivity. PL/pgSQL has a lot of unnecessary stuff that sucks the life out of programmer productivity. And this should be very much a concern of the professionals that support PostgreSQL
>>
>> For example:
>>
>> DECLARE
>> declarations
>> BEGIN
>> statements
>> END
>>
>> This looks a lot like COBOL or Pascal, and today is mostly unnecessary.
>
> It looks like Ada, and that's not an accident. (Nor is it a bad thing.)

First of all it is

[DECLARE
declarations]
BEGIN
statements
END;

Second "statements" includes the whole definition above as a "statement"
and controls identifier visibility and such compatible to PL/SQL.

You want to lose that? Not such a great idea, IMHO.

Jan

--
Jan Wieck
Senior Software Engineer
http://slony.info

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2014-09-02 21:21:03 Re: Escaping from blocked send() reprised.
Previous Message Joel Jacobson 2014-09-02 21:12:42 Re: PL/pgSQL 2