From: Rod Taylor <rbt@rbt.ca>
To: Avi Schwartz <avi@CFFtechnologies.com>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Cc: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: generic return for functions
Date: 01 Jun 2003 08:21:12 -0400
Message-ID: <1054470071.11968.115.camel@jester> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <47F83F6F-93EF-11D7-ACB0-000393AE5044@CFFtechnologies.com>
References: <47F83F6F-93EF-11D7-ACB0-000393AE5044@CFFtechnologies.com>
> thing that causes me some minor grief is the fact that currently you
> cannot have default values to function parameters, a feature we use a
> lot.
The default value is used when the parameter is NULL or unprovided?
fn(integer, integer, integer default 32)
select fn(integer, integer); <- Third argument would be '32'?
When PostgreSQL gets named parameters the above probably makes sense to
add.
A TODO item?
--
Rod Taylor <rbt@rbt.ca>
PGP Key: http://www.rbt.ca/rbtpub.ascAttachments:
signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 186B) download
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Cc: rbt@rbt.ca, avi@CFFtechnologies.com, pgman@candle.pha.pa.us
Subject: Re: generic return for functions
In-Reply-To: <1054470071.11968.115.camel@jester>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox