On tis, 2011-01-11 at 16:57 +0100, Dimitri Fontaine wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> > Making it work for language SQL would be nice, though.
>
> Please consider a new DEPENDENCY_XXX constant for that though, because
> otherwise I think it could cause problems in the extension's dependency
> tracking. Even with a new DEPENDENCY_FUNCALL or other constant, the
> extension code would need to be aware of this new kind of not-to-follow
> dependencies somehow, I guess.
What's a "not-to-follow dependency"?