| From: | "A(dot)M(dot)" <agentm(at)themactionfaction(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: leakproof |
| Date: | 2012-02-26 23:44:12 |
| Message-ID: | B061AFF1-D245-4562-A72B-C266DDD89322@themactionfaction.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Feb 26, 2012, at 10:39 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On ons, 2012-02-22 at 10:56 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>> The trouble with "leakproof" is that it
>> doesn't point to what it is that's not leaking, which is information
>> rather than memory, as many might imagine (and I did) without further
>> hints. I'm not sure any single English word would be as descriptive as
>> I'd like.
>
> Well, we have RETURNS NULL ON NULL INPUT, so maybe DOES NOT LEAK
> INFORMATION. ;-)
If you are willing to go full length, then the computer science term is "referential transparency", no?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Referential_transparency_(computer_science)
So a function could be described as "REFERENTIALLY TRANSPARENT".
Cheers,
M
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2012-02-27 00:10:03 | Re: Misleading CREATE TABLE error |
| Previous Message | Thom Brown | 2012-02-26 23:24:31 | Re: Command Triggers, patch v11 |