Re: Function structure in formatting.c

From: "Brendan Jurd" <direvus(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Function structure in formatting.c
Date: 2007-08-08 16:07:11
Message-ID: 37ed240d0708080907p587c7713l4938afeeeddb32d7@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers pgsql-patches

On 8/9/07, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> "Brendan Jurd" <direvus(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > To my mind, it would make a lot more sense (and make hacking the file
> > a lot easier) if the processing functions were split into to_char and
> > from_char variants. I'm not sure what, if any, advantage is gleaned
> > by having these functions combined.
>
> Yeah, I never liked that approach either. I suppose the idea was to
> keep the to- and from- code for each format code close together, but
> it blurs what's going on to a much greater extent than that's worth.

Okay, I'll see what I can do.

Incidentally, anybody know what DCH is supposed to stand for?
Throughout the code DCH is used to refer to date/time formatting and
NUM to numeric formatting. Just curious.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Decibel! 2007-08-08 16:41:04 Re: [mmoncure@gmail.com: Re: [GENERAL] array_to_set functions]
Previous Message Dave Page 2007-08-08 15:56:08 Re: RIP: Buildfarm member Baiji ??

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Dunstan 2007-08-08 16:41:35 Re: further WIP for COPYable logs
Previous Message Tom Lane 2007-08-08 14:38:28 Re: Function structure in formatting.c