On Tue, 5 Apr 2005, Tom Lane wrote:

Robert Treat <xzilla@users.sourceforge.net> writes:
While it is useless in this example, istm it only makes things more
confusing to require return in some cases but not in others. Is there
some technical advantage to dropping it?
It's about the same either way as far as the code is concerned. But
I've only written a dozen or so plpgsql functions using OUT parameters,
and I've already found having to write a useless RETURN to be tedious
(not to mention that I forgot it a couple times). I don't think I'll be
the last one complaining if we leave in the requirement.

Basically the requirement exists to make sure you don't forget to define
the return value. But when you're using OUT parameters, the existence
of a RETURN statement has nothing to do with defining the return value.
what if not require RETURN iff OUT parameter is defined ?

regards, tom lane

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
(send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo@postgresql.org)
Oleg Bartunov, sci.researcher, hostmaster of AstroNet,
Sternberg Astronomical Institute, Moscow University (Russia)
Internet: oleg@sai.msu.su, http://www.sai.msu.su/~megera/
phone: +007(095)939-16-83, +007(095)939-23-83

Search Discussions

Discussion Posts


Follow ups

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
posts ‹ prev | 8 of 9 | next ›
Discussion Overview
grouppgsql-hackers @
postedApr 5, '05 at 6:28a
activeApr 5, '05 at 3:51p



site design / logo © 2021 Grokbase