On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 12:13 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Timothy Madden <terminatorul@gmail.com> writes:
> > Ok I get it. So Posgres also offers perl and python in addition to SQL.
> > But at least for SQL, which is included and defined in the standard,
> could
> > the syntax be made conforming ?
>
> I think you still haven't got the point: there is *no* function language
> that we offer that exactly matches what the spec has got. Not using
> string-literal syntax, difficult as that is already, would probably
> represent about 1% of the work needed to implement what the spec
> suggests.
>
I would like to put to good use the statements and expression that do match
(SELECT/INSERT/UPDATE/ ...), and the very function declaration syntax is
getting in the way, making even those matches now useless ...
Thank you,
Timothy Madden