| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: RfD: more powerful "any" types |
| Date: | 2009-09-10 19:15:32 |
| Message-ID: | 6711.1252610132@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 2:42 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> 2. Come up with some way to do the equivalent of "variadic any[]",
>> ie, a variable number of not-all-the-same-type arguments. (This isn't
>> just a type-system problem, there's also the question of how the type
>> information would be passed at runtime. IIRC we have a solution at the
>> C level but not for PLs.)
> This also seems like a good idea. Will pg_typeof() work for PL/pgsql?
pg_typeof() applied to what? The existing approach assumes we can make
an array out of the variadic parameters, which isn't going to be the
case here.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2009-09-10 19:20:52 | Re: RfD: more powerful "any" types |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-09-10 19:10:12 | Re: RfD: more powerful "any" types |