On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 8:59 AM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sep 16, 2009, at 8:37 AM, Andrew Dunstan <and...@dunslane.net> wrote: > >> >> >> Abhijit Menon-Sen wrote: >>> >>> At 2009-07-30 13:37:16 -0700, prent...@cisco.com wrote: >>> >>>> This patch changes plpgsql IN parameters so they are mutable. >>>> >>> >>> Makes sense, applies fine, works fine. >>> >>> >>> >> >> How does this compare with PLSQL? I know in Ada an IN argument is in >> effect a constant. I understand the utility, because I occasionally knock >> against this restriction, but if it's incompatible with PLSQL I think we >> should think about it more carefully. > > At worst it's an upward-compatible extension, or am I wrong? If it's > useful, which I think it is, what's the harm?
are we guarding against cases like: select _foo, adjust_foo(_foo) from bar; -- adjust_foo is inout ?? merlin -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
