On Tuesday, June 18, 2024, Ron Johnson <ronljohnso...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 18, 2024 at 1:57 PM David G. Johnston < > david.g.johns...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Tuesday, June 18, 2024, Ron Johnson <ronljohnso...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> But I stand by returning OUT params and records at the same time. >>> >> >> You mean you dislike adding the optional returns clause when output >> parameters exist? >> > > Correct. It breaks the distinction between function and procedure. > How so? The two distinctions are functions can produce sets while procedures get transaction control. They both can produce a single multi-column output record. The presence or absence of the optional return clause on a function definition doesn’t change that fact. > > >> Because the out parameters and the “record” represent the exact same >> thing. >> > > What's the purpose? Legacy of not having procedures? > So people can have a style guide that says always specify a returns clause on function definitions. David J.
