On 11/18/2014 04:11 PM, Pavel Stehule wrote:
2014-11-18 21:27 GMT+01:00 Andrew Dunstan <and...@dunslane.net
<mailto:and...@dunslane.net>>:
On 11/18/2014 02:53 PM, Jim Nasby wrote:
On 11/18/14, 9:31 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
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.
Such as?
The enormous advantage of plpgsql is how easy it is to run
SQL. Every other PL I've looked at makes that WAY harder. And
that's assuming you're in an environment where you can install
another PL.
And honestly, I've never really found plpgsql to be terribly
wordy except in a few cases ("assert" being one of them). My
general experience has been that when I'm doing an IF (other
than assert), I'm doing multiple things in the IF block, so
it's really not that big a deal.
I frequently write one-statement bodies of IF statements. To me
that's not a big deal either :-)
anybody did it, but it doesn't need so it is perfect :) I understand
well to Jim' feeling.
I am looking to Ada 2005 language ... a design of RAISE WITH shows so
RAISE statement is extensible in Ada too. Sure - we can live without
it, but I don't think so we do some wrong with introduction RAISE WHEN
and I am sure, so a live with this feature can be more fun for
someone, who intensive use this pattern.
(drags out recently purchased copy of Barnes "Ada 2012")
Ada's
RAISE exception_name WITH "string";
is more or less the equivalent of our
RAISE level 'format_string';
So I don't think there's much analogy there.
I'm not going to die in a ditch over this, but it does seem to me very
largely unnecessary.
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