Re: proposal: plpgsql, new check for extra_errors - strict_expr_check

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Pavel Stehule
Тема Re: proposal: plpgsql, new check for extra_errors - strict_expr_check
Дата
Msg-id CAFj8pRDOhjka18LDaZ9HBbBjoe31STHZcMF3DyzkOoeLSG23AQ@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: proposal: plpgsql, new check for extra_errors - strict_expr_check  (Marcos Pegoraro <marcos@f10.com.br>)
Ответы Re: proposal: plpgsql, new check for extra_errors - strict_expr_check
Список pgsql-hackers
Дерево обсуждения


ne 16. 6. 2024 v 16:43 odesílatel Marcos Pegoraro <marcos@f10.com.br> napsal:
Em dom., 16 de jun. de 2024 às 11:37, Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> escreveu:

What is the expected benefit? Generally PL/pgSQL has very strict syntax - and using double semicolons makes no sense.

exactly, makes no sense. That is because it should be ignored, right ?
But ok, if this is a different issue, that´s fine.

I don't follow this idea - when it does not make sense, then why do you use it?  It can be a signal of some issue in your code.

The source code should not contain a code that should be ignored.

But I am not a authority - can be interesting if this is allowed in PL/SQL or Ada

Regards

Pavel






regards
Marcos

В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Andrew Dunstan
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Using LibPq in TAP tests via FFI
Следующее
От: "David E. Wheeler"
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: jsonpath: Missing regex_like && starts with Errors?