| From: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Joseph Adams <joeyadams3(dot)14159(at)gmail(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, alvherre <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: functional call named notation clashes with SQL feature |
| Date: | 2010-06-05 14:32:07 |
| Message-ID: | AANLkTilh9z0tn4bodINPJYqKN4cL0aJdEzfz86Hk0ShB@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 3:02 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> No, that really isn't going to work: how will the parser know that the
> names are not meant to match to actual named parameters of the function?
> You could possibly do it with a special case for hstore() in the
> grammar, but we aren't going there, because it wouldn't be extensible.
>
I wonder if we could offer something like VARIADIC but allows
arbitrarily named parameters which get passed in a hstore-like hash
instead of an array. Just thinking aloud here. I haven't thought about
what this would mean in the function call api.
--
greg
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2010-06-05 14:59:27 | Re: functional call named notation clashes with SQL feature |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2010-06-05 14:02:38 | Re: functional call named notation clashes with SQL feature |