On 7/28/14 11:27 AM, Simon Riggs wrote:
> On 26 July 2014 18:14, Marko Tiikkaja <marko@joh.to> wrote:
>
>> Today I'd like to present a way to get rid of code like this:
>
> You haven't explained this very well... there is nothing that explains
> WHY you want this.
>
> In the absence of a good explanation and a viable benefit, I would
> vote -1 for this feature suggestion.
Yes, I did a poor job in the original email, but I did explain my
reasoning later:
> Yes, you can already do this with RAISE but that seems more like an> accident than anything else. I feel a dedicated
syntaxis less error> prone and makes the intent clearer to people reading the code. But I> realize I might be in the
minoritywith this.
I guess -3, +0 is enough that I'll be dropping the patch. Thanks to
everyone who had a look.
.marko