On Fri, May 19, 2006 at 11:03:21PM +0300, Hannu Krosing wrote: > A less disruptive change would be to have some predefined "record" where > all local variables belong to, perhaps called 'local' or '_local_' :) so > one could access both input parameter inp_orderdate and declared > variable var_orderdate as local.inp_orderdate and local.var_orderdate > respectively ? The old use (without local.) should still work.
That might be useful for othing things, too. Having _local. and _parameters. could be handy, for example. But I'm not sure if this is better than using $ or not... IIRC, Oracle handles this by allowing you to prefix variables with the name of the function. You can also have package-level variables, which can be handy (whatever happened to the discussion about adding packages or something similar to plpgsql??) > > I think it would be better to at least strongly recommend always > > prefixing variables and parameters with something. > > At least we should use such convention in our sample code in docs. Yes, at a minimum. > > I'd argue that it'd > > be even better to put us on the road of eventually mandating plpgsql > > variables be prefixed with something (like $), but I'm not holding my > > breath on that one... > > I dont believe in mandating non-backward-compatible changes, but prefix > $ may be one way to disambiguate vars and fieldnames. Well, this could be made optional (strict mode). -- Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant [EMAIL PROTECTED] Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117 vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
