On Mar 27, 2011, at 6:11 AM, Dimitri Fontaine <[email protected]> wrote: > Robert Haas <[email protected]> writes: >> That syntax is sufficiently unwieldly that few people will want to use >> it in real life, but certainly the backward compatibility problem is >> much less than with what Tom proposed. > > Well, we would still support positional arguments like $1 $2 etc, right?
Yeah, that's not going away. ...Robert
