Re: Why lower's not accept an AS declaration ?

Stephan Szabo <sszabo@megazone.bigpanda.com> writes:
> -- This seems really different from our previous standard reading of SQL92
> though.  It implies that you can't really do stuff on input columns
> except in very limited cases and that'd be really bad.

Yes, it seems fraught with bogus restrictions, which makes me wonder if
we're interpreting it correctly.

I could understand a definition that says "unqualified names are first
sought as output column names, and if no match then treated as input
column names; qualified names are always input column names".  Perhaps
that's what they're really trying to do, but why all the strange
verbiage?

            regards, tom lane