"David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Tuesday, June 18, 2024, Ron Johnson <ronljohnsonjr@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> What's the purpose? Legacy of not having procedures? > So people can have a style guide that says always specify a returns clause > on function definitions. To my mind, the reason we allow RETURNS together with OUT parameter(s) is so there's a place to write SETOF if you want that. Yes, the RETURNS TABLE syntax is somewhat redundant with RETURNS SETOF. Blame the SQL standard for that. regards, tom lane
