Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [HACKERS] regular expressions from hell

From: The Hermit Hacker <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>
To: David Gould <dg(at)illustra(dot)com>
Cc: Brett McCormick <brett(at)work(dot)chicken(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)hub(dot)org, pgsql-questions(at)hub(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] regular expressions from hell
Date: 1998-06-01 14:42:21
Message-ID: Pine.BSF.3.96.980601103844.448W-100000@hub.org (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Sun, 31 May 1998, David Gould wrote:

> > 
> > Not to mention the fact that if perl (or mod_perl) is already running
> > (and you're using a shared libperl), the library is already loaded.
> 
> Ok, my vote is to build regexes into the pgsql binary or into a .so that
> we distribute. There should be no need to have perl installed on a system
> to run postgresql. If we are going to extend the language to improve on
> the very lame sql92 like clause, we need to have it be part of the system
> that can be counted on, not something you might or might not have depending
> on what else is installed.

	Odd question here, but how many systems nowadays *don't* have Perl
installed that would be running PostgreSQL?  IMHO, perl is an invaluable
enough tool that I can't imagine a site not running it *shrug*



In response to

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Thomas G. LockhartDate: 1998-06-01 15:08:08
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] duplicate oids in pg_proc
Previous:From: Brett McCormickDate: 1998-06-01 14:27:50
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] regular expressions from hell

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group