On Thu, 2005-02-10 at 23:32 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Congratulations, you just reinvented the scheme we used before 8.0.
> It's *not* an improvement. The dot-dot business is better.
Right -- but it's not very good either, and I was trying to find a
proper solution. For now I've given up and reverted the code to use the
> > Yes, that's a good point. I'll change the patch to just elide the
> > previous entry from the stack of callbacks, which is going to be
> > plpgsql_compile_error_callback (unfortunately we can't actually verify
> > that, AFAICS, since that callback is private to pl_comp.c)
> IMHO verifying that is well worth an extern.
Attached is a revised patch that incorporates your suggestions. Sorry
for the delay in posting this.
Barring any further objections, I'll commit this to HEAD tomorrow.
In response to
pgsql-patches by date
|Next:||From: Dave Page||Date: 2005-02-18 12:49:36|
|Subject: Re: UTF8 or Unicode|
|Previous:||From: Zhenbang Wei||Date: 2005-02-18 06:14:31|
|Subject: Update Traditional Chinese translations for 8.0 branch|