| From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: elog() proposal |
| Date: | 2002-02-23 00:57:54 |
| Message-ID: | 200202230057.g1N0vsr19243@candle.pha.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > OK, so elog(ERROR, ...) and PGError(msg, ...) would be the same. Makes
> > sense. Should we consider hiding these in macros so they really still
> > call elog(ERROR, ...) for backward compatiblity?
>
> I would love to make them macros, but I don't know a portable way to
> create macros with variable numbers of arguments. Do you feel like
> writing double parens?
>
> PGERROR((msg, ...))
Then we have to wonder what PGError is getting us that elog(ERROR)
isn't, except the ability to do internationalization based on the first
parameter.
--
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
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2002-02-23 01:13:47 | Re: elog() proposal |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2002-02-23 00:56:01 | Re: elog() proposal |