On 09/04/2014 11:16 AM, Joel Jacobson wrote:
On 4 sep 2014, at 16:45, Hannu Krosing <ha...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
When looking from the other end of the problem, we are
using SELECT/INSERT/UPDATE/DELETE *SET statements* in pl/pgsql
when we really want scalars.
My understanding is that one main drivers of starting this thread
was wanting also guaranteed SCALAR versions of these.
And wanting them in a way that is easy to use.
+1
Thank you! I have been trying to explain this in multiple cryptic ways
but failed. You just nailed it! That's *exactly* what I mean!
I believe we all agree that the availability of most of the proposed
functionality is desirable.
I think the main difference between your point of view and that of a few
others (me included) is that you prefer a language that is easy and fast
to type, with as few key strokes as possible, while we prefer a language
that is similar to SQL, which is rather verbose to the reader. At least
when the discussion is about the default procedural language installed
with the core database system.
Such a language should be as similar as possible to SQL. Which is the
reason why I believe that the CHECK clause belongs into the main parser,
not into the PL.
Regards,
Jan
--
Jan Wieck
Senior Software Engineer
http://slony.info
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
