Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1W24WT-0000oh-4h for pgsql-docs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Sat, 11 Jan 2014 19:47:09 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with smtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1W24WS-0003CM-GP for pgsql-docs@arkaria.postgresql.org; Sat, 11 Jan 2014 19:47:08 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:7903:4::125]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1W24WR-0003CG-UY for pgsql-docs@postgresql.org; Sat, 11 Jan 2014 19:47:08 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1W24WQ-00027C-27 for pgsql-docs@postgresql.org; Sat, 11 Jan 2014 19:47:07 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s0BJkwE8025082; Sat, 11 Jan 2014 14:46:58 -0500 From: Tom Lane To: Bruce Momjian cc: Pavel Stehule , pgsql-docs Subject: Re: remove undocumented assign syntax from plpgsql doc In-reply-to: <20140111193907.GL28089@momjian.us> References: <20140111184106.GF28089@momjian.us> <24220.1389466350@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20140111190246.GG28089@momjian.us> <24577.1389467569@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20140111193907.GL28089@momjian.us> Comments: In-reply-to Bruce Momjian message dated "Sat, 11 Jan 2014 14:39:07 -0500" Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2014 14:46:58 -0500 Message-ID: <25081.1389469618@sss.pgh.pa.us> X-Pg-Spam-Score: -2.0 (--) List-Archive: List-Help: List-ID: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Mailing-List: pgsql-docs Precedence: bulk Sender: pgsql-docs-owner@postgresql.org Bruce Momjian writes: > OK, here is an updated doc patch that does that. You're still only touching the variable-initialization case, which seems like the least important place to document it. I'd have put it with the assignment-statement documentation. Perhaps something like Here, and in other contexts such as variable initialization, the assignment operator can be written = as well as :=. The latter is the preferred spelling, though. > The next question is > whether we want examples using '=' instead of ':='? Right now we have > them, and Pavel's patch removed them. AFAIR, we have some of both, and I'm fine with that status quo. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-docs mailing list (pgsql-docs@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-docs