On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 11:13 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > One reason to argue for the other way is that maybe it wouldn't only > be consulted by plpgsql. In particular I can easily imagine SQL > functions having the same issue as soon as someone gets around to > letting them use names for their parameters.
I don't have a strong feeling on the core issue but I don't agree with this point. AIUI, we are implementing multiple behaviors here for reasons of backward and competing-product compatibility. Presumably, if we're starting from scratch, we'll pick a sensible behavior - probably error in the case of SQL - and stick with it. ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
