út 4. 3. 2025 v 0:04 odesílatel Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> napsal:
> Pavel Stehule <pavel.steh...@gmail.com> writes: > >> po 24. 2. 2025 v 21:05 odesílatel Gilles Darold <gil...@darold.net> > >> napsal: > >>> I think it could be ready to be committed. > > Pushed with a docs/test correction: this also affects the syntax > of FOR-over-cursor. > > >>> Note for the committer: does it make sense to mention in the > >>> documentation that this standard SQL/PSM syntax is preferred than the > PG > >>> syntax? > > > I modified doc in same manner like function's named arguments are > described > Thank you very much Regards Pavel > > I didn't especially care for this change and didn't include it. We've > had the := syntax for decades and aren't likely to ever remove it, > so why start acting like it's deprecated? > > regards, tom lane >
