On 02/26/2014 01:51 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
On 02/26/2014 10:15 AM, salah jubeh wrote:
I think, there is a difference between optional parameters and default
parameter values. So, my suggestion would be something like this.
SELECT default_test(1,3, DEFAULT); -- match function number 1
SELECT default_test(1,3); -- match the function number 2
SELECT default_test(1); -- ERROR
Regards
This would break at least 4 major applications which I personally have
worked on, and the benefit to users is unclear at best.
One of the main reasons to *have* default parameters is to allow adding
new parameters to existing functions without breaking old application
code. So, -1 from me.
me too.
The OP's statement that there is a difference between default params and
optional params doesn't compute. The only way params are optional is
that they have a default. Treating these as somehow independent is a
nonsense.
Furthermore, if we dropped function 2, then
select default_test(1,3)
would be a call to function 1. Then, if we followed this proposal,
creating function 2 would magically steer that call to function 2
instead. Talk about a footgun, and possibly a security risk too.
cheers
andrew
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
