On 24 November 2011 14:12, Alban Hertroys <haram...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 24 November 2011 14:52, Gavin Casey <gpjca...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > This works in 9.1.1 but seems like a bug to me: > > > > create function xout(_x INTEGER) > > returns integer > > as $$ > > begin > > _x = _x * 2; > > I would expect an error here, as having an expression without a > context (an if-statement, for example) should be illegal. > > An assignment should be fine though: > _x := _x * 2; > > I'm guessing people make errors like this frequently enough that the > parser was relaxed to accept this expression as an assignment, even > though the syntax for those is slightly different. There is no other > possible explanation for such a line, after all, the author of this > code clearly meant to put an assignment there. > > > return _x; > > end; > > $$ LANGUAGE plpgsql; > > > > select xout(4); > > What is the output? I'm guessing it's 8, since there was no syntax > error. That would be the right answer too, in that case. > Function-local variables don't matter outside the function, after all. > -- > If you can't see the forest for the trees, > Cut the trees and you'll see there is no forest. > It was actually the reassignment of an IN parameter that I was questioning, the '=' sign on it's own was my typo, apologies for confusion.
