Re: functional call named notation clashes with SQL feature

At 2010-05-27 08:50:18 +0200, pavel.stehule@gmail.com wrote:
>
> I don't see any advantage of "FOR". We can change ir to support new
> standard or don't change it.

Adopting FOR would mean we don't use AS in a way that conflicts with the
standard. That's its only advantage. But I agree with you, I don't think
it's worth inventing a new non-standard wart for this case.

I don't really like the idea of getting rid of => as an operator either;
I'm torn between staying true to the standard and politely looking the
other way as Tom suggested we might end up doing.

-- ams