On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 12:49 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > "David E. Wheeler" <da...@kineticode.com> writes: >> I'd sure love $, as it's like shell, Perl, and other stuff. > > This discussion has gotten utterly off track. The problem I am trying > to solve is a non-Oracle-compatible behavior in plpgsql. I have got > substantially less than zero interest in proposals that "solve" the > problem by introducing notations that don't even pretend to be > compatible.
Personally, I'd vote against a GUC option. I just plain don't like the idea that a function could do different things depending on server configuration. TBH, I'm not very happy with #option either. That said, I agree that Oracle method is far better. Maybe invent a new language handler? plpgsql2 or shorten to pgsql? Now you can mess around all you want (and maybe fix some other compatibility warts at the same time). merlin -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
