Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Last minute mini-proposal (I know, Iknow)forPQexecf()

From: <korryd(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Last minute mini-proposal (I know, Iknow)forPQexecf()
Date: 2007-04-01 12:23:12
Message-ID: 1175430192.6784.85.camel@sakai.localdomain (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> I don't necessarily object to PQexecf() as a shortcut for some
> multi-step operation, but I don't think you've got the format string
> semantics down yet.


I'm thinking that we could start with the "standard" conversion
specifiers - those are well understood and would be expected by just
about any C developer.

In particular, the %d, %u, %e, and %f format specifiers are immediately
useful.

If we start with the "standard" set, you can start to use PQexecf()
immediately and we could promise to maintain *at least* that set.

We can add more specifiers (for proper quoting and such) later - we
can't break existing client applications if we just add to the set of
supported specifiers; the function gets more useful as time goes by.


            -- Korry

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Guillaume SmetDate: 2007-04-01 15:13:39
Subject: Re: Column storage positions
Previous:From: Martijn van OosterhoutDate: 2007-04-01 10:30:51
Subject: Re: Bug in UTF8-Validation Code?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group