Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> Is there anything fundamentally difficult with supporting "PROCEDURE
> foo()" as equivalent with "FUNCTION foo() RETURNS opaque" and "CALL foo()"
> as equivalent with "SELECT foo()" and throw away the result.
I'd like to see us *not* overload "opaque" with yet another meaning;
see past rants on subject. But as long as there was a distinguishable
representation of "returns void" in pg_proc, I'd see no problem with the
above.
plpgsql presently spells "CALL" as "PERFORM"; should we stick with that
precedent?
regards, tom lane