Re: [HACKERS] Is this really really as designed or defined in some standard

"Pavel Stehule" <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> writes:
> 2008/9/2 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>:
>> BTW, there are actually two separate issues here: input parameters and
>> output parameters. After brief thought it seems like we should enforce
>> uniqueness of non-omitted parameter names for IN parameters (including
>> INOUT), and separately enforce uniqueness of non-omitted parameter names
>> for OUT parameters (including INOUT).

> It's well thought, but I afraid so this can hide some bug, and it's
> little bit dangerous.

> I thing, so we can simply duplicate values in result then allowing
> duplicate params in function.

Um ... what? I'm not sure what behavior you're proposing here.

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