"David G. Johnston" <david.g.johns...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Tuesday, June 18, 2024, Ron Johnson <ronljohnso...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> What's the purpose? Legacy of not having procedures?
> So people can have a style guide that says always specify a returns clause
> on function definitions.
To my mind, the reason we allow RETURNS together with OUT parameter(s)
is so there's a place to write SETOF if you want that.
Yes, the RETURNS TABLE syntax is somewhat redundant with RETURNS
SETOF. Blame the SQL standard for that.
regards, tom lane
