Tom Lane writes:
> Peter Eisentraut <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Tom Lane writes:
> >> case 1: "immutable"
> >> case 2: "mutable", or perhaps "stable"
> >> case 3: "volatile"
>
> > Since they've changed anyway, how about dropping the silly "is" in front
> > of the names?
>
> "volatile" would conflict with a C keyword. Possibly we could get away
> with this at the SQL level, but I was worried...
In general, I was thinking about migrating the CREATE FUNCTION syntax more
into consistency with other commmands and with the SQL standard.
Basically I'd like to write
CREATE FUNCTION name (args, ...) RETURNS type
AS '...'
LANGUAGE foo
STATIC
IMPLICIT CAST
(where everything after RETURNS can be in random order).
OK, so the key words are not the same as SQL, but it looks a lot
friendlier this way. We're already migrating CREATE DATABASE, I think,
and the names of the options have changed, too, so this might be a good
time.
--
Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
