On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 8:58 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >> On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 5:52 PM, Andrew Dunstan <and...@dunslane.net> wrote: >>> That doesn't mean we should arbitrarily break compatibility with pl/sql, nor >>> that we should feel free to add on warts such as $varname that are >>> completely at odds with the style of the rest of the language. That doesn't >>> do anything except produce a mess. > >> Well, what it does is avoid breaking compatibility with previous >> versions of PostgreSQL. I think that actually does have some value. >> Otherwise, we'd be folding to upper-case by default. > > Well, if we're going to consider 100% backwards compatibility a "must", > then we should just stick with what the submitted patch does, ie, > unqualified names are matched first to query columns, and to parameters > only if there's no column match. This is also per spec if I interpreted > Peter's comments correctly. The whole thread started because I > suggested that throwing an error for ambiguous cases might be a better > design in the long run, but apparently long term ease of code > maintenance is far down our list of priorities ...
+1, as long as you are 100.0% sure this is not going to break any existing code. For example, what happens if the argument is named the same as a table? merlin -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
