> "Pavel Stehule" <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> writes:
>> I understand now why Oracle use => symbol for named params. This isn't
>> used so operator - so implementation is trivial.
>
> You really didn't understand the objection at all, did you?
>
> The point is not about whether there is any built-in operator named =>.
> The point is that people might have created user-defined operators named
> that.
I understand well, so only I don't see better solution. Yes, everyone
who used => should have problems, but it is similar with .. new
keywords, etc. Probably easy best syntax doesn't exist :(. I haven't
idea who use => now and how often, and if this feature is possible in
pg, but there are not technical barriers.
regards
Pavel Stehule
>
> regards, tom lane
>
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
No comments:
Post a Comment