| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Friedrich Dodt <friedrich(dot)dodt(at)efonds24(dot)de>, pgsql-interfaces(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Where is PLbash ?? |
| Date: | 2002-06-25 20:39:48 |
| Message-ID: | 10645.1025037588@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-interfaces |
Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> There's a difference between making a dangerous thing possible and
>> encouraging people to do it. But I'll wait and see what Peter thinks.
> I think Peter agrees with you. My point is that we can PL/sh and
> document it's limitations. With perl, the ability is there but it isn't
> obviouis why it is a problem.
Well, there's some merit in that argument: the pl/sh chapter would be an
ideal place to explain in bright red letters why pl/sh is dangerous ;-),
and then we could cross-reference that discussion from plperlu and
pltclu, which don't really have good places to put a long discussion
about the risks.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jan Wieck | 2002-06-25 20:53:58 | Re: Where is PLbash ?? |
| Previous Message | Brett Schwarz | 2002-06-25 19:31:13 | Re: Where is PLbash ?? |