Re: plpgsql: another new reserved word

On 11/10/07, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> The current plpgsql code seems to be designed to force a qualifier to be
> interpreted as a block label if at all possible, even if there are
> more-closely-nested alternative interpretations; so in the above example
> it would assign to the outer variable bar.  This seems a tad bogus
> to me.  Can anyone comment on how Oracle handles cases like this?

Some googling brought following link:
http://download-uk.oracle.com/docs/cd/B14117_01/appdev.101/b10807/d_names.htm

I have not parsed it completely, but rule seems simple - inner
scope overrides outer one and no magic on unqualified idents,
if ident is unqualified, it wont be matched to schema, block
or some other qualifier.  (well, at least no such magic behaviour
is mentioned.)

-- 
marko