Re: ruleutils with pretty-print option

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andreas Pflug <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: ruleutils with pretty-print option
Date: 2003-07-30 22:58:10
Message-ID: 25554.1059605890@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches

Andreas Pflug <pgadmin(at)pse-consulting(dot)de> writes:
> I recoded the stuff as Tom recommended, leaving the non-pretty version
> function names as they used to be, inventing new pg_get_XXXX_ext
> functions for the extended stuff, and pushing the code down into
> pg_get_XXXX_worker functions when needed. We now need the additional
> prototype include patch from builtins.h.

Applied with some editorializing. In particular, I don't believe the
original did the right thing with (a - (b - c)).

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Sean Chittenden 2003-07-30 23:07:59 Re: [PATCHES] [PATCH] Re: Why READ ONLY transactions?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2003-07-30 22:22:55 Re: [PATCHES] [PATCH] Re: Why READ ONLY transactions?