2008/9/2 Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> "Pavel Stehule" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> 2008/9/2 Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>> BTW, there are actually two separate issues here: input parameters and
>>> output parameters. After brief thought it seems like we should enforce
>>> uniqueness of non
"Pavel Stehule" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 2008/9/2 Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> BTW, there are actually two separate issues here: input parameters and
>> output parameters. After brief thought it seems like we should enforce
>> uniqueness of non-omitted parameter names for IN parameters (i
2008/9/2 Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> "Pavel Stehule" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> 2008/9/1 Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>> However, since this is a behavioral change that could break code that
>>> works now, I think it should be a HEAD-only change; no backpatch.
>
>> I agree - it's could br
"Pavel Stehule" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 2008/9/1 Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> However, since this is a behavioral change that could break code that
>> works now, I think it should be a HEAD-only change; no backpatch.
> I agree - it's could break only 100% wrong code, but it could problem
2008/9/1 Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hannu Krosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> So, should this be fixed at calling / SQL side (by not allowing
>> repeating argument names) or at pl side for each pl separately ?
>
> I'm for fixing it just once, ie, in CREATE FUNCTION. I can't imagine
> any s
Hannu Krosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> So, should this be fixed at calling / SQL side (by not allowing
> repeating argument names) or at pl side for each pl separately ?
I'm for fixing it just once, ie, in CREATE FUNCTION. I can't imagine
any scenario where it's a good idea to have duplicate
On Mon, 2008-09-01 at 11:15 +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote:
> 2008/9/1 Magnus Hagander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > Pavel Stehule wrote:
> >> Hello
> >>
> >> 2008/8/31 Hannu Krosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >>>
> >>> hannu=# create or replace function ffa(a int, a int) returns int
> >>> language plpgsql as
2008/9/1 Magnus Hagander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Pavel Stehule wrote:
>> Hello
>>
>> 2008/8/31 Hannu Krosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>> It seems that we allow several function arguments to have same
>>> name (or is it label :)
>>>
>>> hannu=# create or replace function ff(a int, a int) returns int lan
Pavel Stehule wrote:
> Hello
>
> 2008/8/31 Hannu Krosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> It seems that we allow several function arguments to have same
>> name (or is it label :)
>>
>> hannu=# create or replace function ff(a int, a int) returns int language
>> plpgsql as $$begin return $1+$2; end;$$;
>> C
Hello
2008/8/31 Hannu Krosing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> It seems that we allow several function arguments to have same
> name (or is it label :)
>
> hannu=# create or replace function ff(a int, a int) returns int language
> plpgsql as $$begin return $1+$2; end;$$;
> CREATE FUNCTION
> hannu=# select f
> hannu=# create or replace function ffa(a int, a int) returns int
> language plpgsql as $$begin return a + a; end;$$;
> CREATE FUNCTION
> hannu=# select ffa(1,2);
> ffa
> -
>2
> (1 row)
>
> Is this defined by some standard or just an oversight ?
It's just an oversight.
What about the si
On Mon, Sep 01, 2008 at 12:55:21AM +0300, Hannu Krosing wrote:
> It seems that we allow several function arguments to have same
> name (or is it label :)
Ugh!
> hannu=# create or replace function ff(a int, a int) returns int language
> plpgsql as $$begin return $1+$2; end;$$;
> CREATE FUNCTION
>
It seems that we allow several function arguments to have same
name (or is it label :)
hannu=# create or replace function ff(a int, a int) returns int language
plpgsql as $$begin return $1+$2; end;$$;
CREATE FUNCTION
hannu=# select ff(1,1);
ff
2
(1 row)
hannu=# select ff(1,2);
ff
13 matches
Mail list logo
