On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 11:33 AM, Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@commandprompt.com> wrote: > Excerpts from Robert Haas's message of lun abr 18 09:33:06 -0300 2011: > >> I don't much like Jim's syntax suggestion (the alias really ought to >> be declared within the function body, I think, not added to the CREATE >> FUNCTION statement) but I don't necessarily think it's a bad idea. >> What would be even better, in my view, is having a short alias that is >> defined by default, but all previous proposals in this vein have been >> shot down by Tom and Andrew. As a practical matter, though, I think >> what Jim is talking about speaks to a real need - people want to make >> SQL function names long and descriptive, but they do NOT want to spell >> out that long function name 16 times inside the function body. > > plpgsql has the #option thing in functions; why can't we have something > similar in SQL functions? > > CREATE FUNCTION function_with_really_really_descriptive_name ( > some_parameter int > ) RETURNS int LANGUAGE SQL AS $$ > #option function_alias fwrrdn > SELECT fwrrdn.some_parameter > $$; > > Not necessarily that exact syntax.
If we are rejecting $foo on grounds of deviating from sql standard, shouldn't this be rejected on the same grounds? There is no such syntax in sql/psm. merlin -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
