From: "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@xxxxxxxxx> > On Wed, Dec 1, 2021 at 12:44 PM Jenda Krynicky <Jenda@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > How's that a variable for gawd's sake? It's a column name too! A > > column name in the definition of the resulting table. > > > > The columns of the returns table are provided to the function as variables > so that one can write: > > output_column1 := 'value'; > output_column2 := 'value'; > return; > > Instead of having to do: > return (output_column1, output_column2); Yeah ... after I specified that instead of a few scalars I intend to return a resultset/recordset/table/whatever-you-want-to-call-it and while using a language that cannot distinguish between columns and variables even at a place that doesn't accept anything other than a column name. Right. > > Right. Because lowercasing everything I write and then comparing it case > > sensitively to the names of database objects makes a lot of sense. I mean > > who would want to use capital letters in names of objects in the first > > place? > > > > Fair point, but you're not going to get much sympathy for not knowing the > rules of the tool that you are using and the choices you've made regarding > them. I agree that your quoting everything has merit, but don't go > complaining that when you forgot the quotes the system tells you the name > is no longer found. I did not create the table and I did not forget the quotes. I removed them in one of many attempts to appease PostgreSQL. I've already learned about those braindead rules. Jenda ===== Jenda@xxxxxxxxxxx === http://Jenda.Krynicky.cz ===== When it comes to wine, women and song, wizards are allowed to get drunk and croon as much as they like. -- Terry Pratchett in Sourcery
