Re: Proposal: stand-alone composite types

Joe Conway writes:

> 3. Modify CREATE FUNCTION to allow the implicit creation of a dependent
>     composite type, e.g.:

Forgive this blunt question, but:  Why?

Of course I can see the answer, it's convenient, but wouldn't the system
be more consistent overall if all functions and types are declared
explicitly?

-- 
Peter Eisentraut   peter_e@gmx.net