Alexander Klenin wrote:

> Is there any advantage for "true" functions as compared "procedures as
> functions"?

Full SQL-99 compliance. As well as some level of Oracle/DB2/ASA/etc
compatibility.

> It seems to me that the solution you described is both more complex
> and less general.

Did you read the recent "procedures extention RFC" thread? Do we need more
issues here? What should a procedure without SUSPEND return if invoked as a
function? Which value should procedure with two output parameters return?
First one? Error at the compile time? If is allowed to alter SP (e.g. change
output parameters) used as a function in another SP? My suggestion is more
complex from the implementation POV, but much simplier from the usage POV.


Dmitry