On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 2:30 PM, Pavel Stehule <pavel.steh...@gmail.com> wrote: > It is way how to do COBOL from plpgsql. I am against it. Start to develop > new language what will support fast development, but it is wrong way for > plpgsql - and It is out my interest
Are you saying COBOL by default update's one row and throws an error otherwise? In what way could *not* changing the syntax of a standard UPDATE command, but changing the *behaviour*, in plpgsql2, be deemed to be a step in the COBOL direction? I don't want a new language, I love plpgsql, I just want to love it a bit more, I don't think I have to clarify on that any more. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
