On 16/07/18 15:56, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
On 11.07.18 19:07, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
It's confusing, and risks conflicting with future additions to
the standard. ECPG supports the actual standard syntax, with OPEN,
right? So this wouldn't be consistent with ECPG, either.
It would be consistent for the case of no parameters.
True. Except that if I understand correctly, in the standard syntax you
still need to use OPEN after the DECLARE CURSOR, even when there are no
parameters.
Curiously, the direct EXECUTE statement uses the non-standard syntax
EXECUTE prep_stmt (param, param);
instead of the standard
EXECUTE prep_stmt USING param, param;
I tried to consolidate this. But using
DECLARE c CURSOR FOR p (foo, bar)
leads to parsing conflicts (and looks confusing?),
How about
DECLARE c CURSOR FOR EXECUTE p (foo, bar)
That's not the standard syntax for the case of no parameters.
My thinking here is that "DECLARE c CURSOR FOR <statement>" is standard
syntax. And we already have "EXECUTE p (foo, bar)" as a form of
statement, along with "SELECT ...", "EXPLAIN ..." and so forth. Allowing
"DECLARE c CURSOR FOR EXECUTE p (foo, bar)" would not introduce a new
syntax, it would just allow the existing two commands, DECLARE CURSOR,
and EXECUTE, to be used together.
- Heikki
