On Sun, Aug 1, 2010 at 10:47 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Pavel Stehule <pavel.steh...@gmail.com> writes: >> so my plan > >> a) fix problem with ambiguous $function* like you proposed >> b) fix problem with "first row excepting" - I can activate a detection >> only for plpgsql language - I can identify LANGUAGE before. > > Ick. We should absolutely NOT have a client-side special case for plpgsql. > > Personally I'd be fine with dropping the special case from the plpgsql > parser --- I don't believe that that behavior was ever discussed, much > less documented, and I doubt that many people rely on it or even know > it exists.
+1. > The need to count lines manually in function definitions is > far less than it was back when that kluge was put in. Why? > If anyone can make a convincing case that it's a good idea to ignore > leading newlines, we should reimplement the behavior in such a way that > it applies across the board to all PLs (ie, make CREATE FUNCTION strip > a leading newline before storing the text). However, then you'd have > issues about whether or when to put back the newline, so I'm not really > in favor of that route. Ditto. As a procedural note, if we decide to go this route, this should be split into two patches - one that removes the line-numbering kludge, and a second for the psql changes. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
