I would suggest to throw a error, or at least a warning.
This will FORCE people to program in the correct way.
I also thought that 'IF $1 THEN ...' should work ok but giving it a other
thought it's indeed stuped to write that way (I'm from the C world...)
Ries
-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
V
Define the language! If it breaks code, so be it.
2. Throw an error if the _expression_ doesn't return boolean.
Yes, yes, absolutely.
By definition "an IF, WHILE, or EXIT statement is a boolean _expression_"
SO
if "some stupid piece of text" THEN
should not compile, there is no BOOLEAN _expre
Manfred Koizar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon, 08 Sep 2003 11:40:32 -0400, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>> 4. Use the parser's coerce_to_boolean procedure, so that nonbooleans
>> will be accepted in exactly the same cases where they'd be accepted
>> in a boolean-requiring SQL constru
On Mon, 08 Sep 2003 11:40:32 -0400, Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>4. Use the parser's coerce_to_boolean procedure, so that nonbooleans
> will be accepted in exactly the same cases where they'd be accepted
> in a boolean-requiring SQL construct (such as CASE). (By default,
> none are,
