> I propose removing the tlist from function-call nodes.  To handle field
> selection, we should instead invent a separate "FieldSelect" expression
> operator that is applied to the result of the function call, or perhaps
> someday other kinds of expressions that can return tuples.  Aside from
> saving space, we'll be able to cleanly represent both the result type of
> the function (ie, the tuple datatype) and the type of the field (which
> will be the result of the FieldSelect node).  Right now there's only one
> node field that represents the result type of the function call, so we
> can't remember the actual result type of the function call itself.

I totally agree.  That structure is very confusing, and it is hard to
know what they mean.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us               |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

In response to

• Anyone particularly wedded to func_tlist mechanism? at 2000-08-03 22:15:19 from Tom Lane

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:	From: Hiroshi Inoue	Date: 2000-08-04 00:02:33
	Subject: RE: Raw constraint & pg_relcheck.rcsrc
Previous:	From: Tom Lane	Date: 2000-08-03 22:15:19
	Subject: Anyone particularly wedded to func_tlist mechanism?