On Wed, Oct 7, 2009 at 5:45 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > I think what he was considering was the question of insisting that > the VARIADIC keyword be attached to the named argument that actually > matches the VARIADIC parameter. I think we could do it, but it might > be a bit of a wart. I notice that right now, an unnecessary VARIADIC > keyword in a regular positional call does not cause an error, it's just > ignored --- so we're already being a bit lax with it.
I'd be more inclined to to tighten up the place where we're currently being lax than to treat additional situations in a similarly lax manner. ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
