2010/5/27 Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us>: > Peter Eisentraut <pete...@gmx.net> writes: >> On tor, 2010-05-27 at 12:59 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >>> I'm afraid FOR doesn't work either; it'll create a conflict with the >>> spec-defined SUBSTRING(x FOR y) syntax. > >> How about >> select myfunc(a := 7, b := 6); >> ? > > Hey, that's a thought. We couldn't have used that notation before > because we didn't have := as a separate token, but since I hacked that > in for plpgsql's benefit, I think it might be an easy fix. It'd be > nice that it puts the argument name first like the spec syntax, too.
I can live with it. Regards Pavel > > Question #1: is the SQL committee likely to standardize that out > from under us, too? > > Question #2: will ecpg have a problem with this? Or psql for that > matter (can you have a psql variable named '=')? > > regards, tom lane > > -- > Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers > -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
