On 11/18/2014 04:23 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
On 18 November 2014 01:00, Jim Nasby <jim.na...@bluetreble.com> wrote:
On 11/17/14, 4:58 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
Great, looks good to me, marking as ready for committer.
What is wrong with using IF ?
It's a hell of a lot wordier. I've previously created a more sophisticated
"assert" framework to allow more control over things, but ended up also
using it just for simple sanity checking because it was much nicer than
typeing IF THEN RAISE ERROR END IF.
Why is that not a requirement for a less wordier form of IF?
IF (something) THEN action
Why is this problem specific to RAISE?
Please, no. The use of closed form rather than open form IF statements
is one of the things Ada (and by inheritance PLPGSQL) got right.
Frankly, I find this whole proposal, and all the suggested alternatives,
somewhat ill-conceived. PLPGSQL is a wordy language. If you want
something more terse, use something else. Adding these sorts of
syntactic sugar warts onto the language doesn't seem like a terribly
good way to proceed.
cheers
andrew
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
