2008/6/24 Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > Tom Lane wrote: >> >> Your point about the syntax is good though. It would be better if >> the syntax were like >> >> create function foo (a text, variadic b int[]) >> >> or maybe even better >> >> create function foo (a text, variadic b int) >> >> since (a) this makes it much more obvious to the reader what the >> function might match, and (b) it leaves the door open for marking >> multiple parameters as variadic, if we can figure out what that means. >> >> >> > > Yes. I understand from the family Java expert that (surface syntax issues > aside) the second is similar to the way Java does this, in fact, so there's > some precedent. That would mean that your first would actually mean each > variadic arg has to be an array of ints, which we might well want to provide > for. > > So with that modification I'll be lots happier with the feature.
I don't see problem with your syntax. It well block combination OUT and VARIADIC parameter - my one request, variadic parameter have to be array. It's more consistent with following procedure implementation - inside procedures is really array. sample: CREATE OR REPLACE least(varidic values numeric[]) --< ARRAY RETURNS numeric AS $$ SELECT $1[i] --< ARRAY FROM Regards Pavel Stehule p.s. with one exception "any", because there isn't possible array from "any" > > cheers > > andrew > -- Sent via pgsql-patches mailing list (pgsql-patches@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-patches
