> I don't see any reason that Jaybird can't support both types of
> procedures correctly and transparently without changing or extending
> syntax.

It already does, however it needs a hint from a developer. And it
would be great, if the hint comes not from developer, but from
database. Your suggestion with a flag is exactly what I would need.
Though Dmitry has mentioned an info flag, and I have to check this first.

> I wouldn't have designed procedures the way Borland did, but
> it's done, and it's better that we live with it than upset everyone
> and change the syntax for no great benefit. We have all the
> information we need to tag procedures by type in the metadata at
> procedure definition time.

I like the idea to introduce CALL statement as suggested by Dmitry Y.
(or extend EXECUTE PROCEDURE as suggested by Dmitry K.). And I would
expect it to work uniformly for all types of stored procedures. But
maybe we should first discuss, maybe we want to change/extend/replace
the current PSQL so I would go first for a flag, and after discussing
the "ideal" stored procedure think whether to extend current or add
something new.

And please do not consider all this to be my personal kink (as I have
seen "It works with IBX/FIB/etc, then it's Java problem"). We want the
project to win more and more customers, so let's make the transition
life easier.

Roman