On 11/18/2014 02:53 PM, Jim Nasby wrote:
> On 11/18/14, 9:31 AM, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>>
>> Frankly, I find this whole proposal, and all the suggested
>> alternatives, somewhat ill-conceived. PLPGSQL is a wordy language. If
>> you want something more terse, use something else. Adding these sorts
>> of syntactic sugar warts onto the language doesn't seem like a
>> terribly good way to proceed.
>
> Such as?
>
> The enormous advantage of plpgsql is how easy it is to run SQL. Every
> other PL I've looked at makes that WAY harder. And that's assuming
> you're in an environment where you can install another PL.
>
> And honestly, I've never really found plpgsql to be terribly wordy
> except in a few cases ("assert" being one of them). My general
> experience has been that when I'm doing an IF (other than assert), I'm
> doing multiple things in the IF block, so it's really not that big a
> deal.
>
I frequently write one-statement bodies of IF statements. To me that's
not a big deal either :-)
cheers
andrew