2016-03-22 6:06 GMT+01:00 Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us>: > Pavel Stehule <pavel.steh...@gmail.com> writes: > > I can live with SELECT fx(x). It is little bit dangerous, but this risk > can > > be easy detected by plpgsql_check. > > Dangerous how? >
I afraid of useless and forgotten call of functions. But the risk is same like PERFORM - so this is valid from one half. The PERFORM statement holds special semantic, and it is interesting. But I don't see any risk if we allow SELECT fx(x) without INTO when fx is void function. It is absolutely correct. > > >> So, I'm -1 on not having any keyword at all. I have no objection > >> to Merlin's proposal though. I agree that PERFORM is starting to > >> look a bit silly, since it doesn't play with WITH for instance. > > > Isn't time to fix PERFORM instead? > > I do not think it can be fixed without embedding knowledge of PERFORM into > the core parser, which I doubt anybody would consider a good idea. > I don't see, why PERFORM should be in core parser? What use case should be fixed? Regards Pavel > > regards, tom lane >
