From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Tim Bunce <Tim(dot)Bunce(at)pobox(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Initial refactoring of plperl.c - draft [PATCH] |
Date: | 2009-11-24 16:57:06 |
Message-ID: | 18765.1259081826@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tim Bunce <Tim(dot)Bunce(at)pobox(dot)com> writes:
> The next step I plan is to move the large multi-line string literal
> macros (PERLBOOT, SAFE_OK etc) into external perl code files.
> That'll make refactoring, extending and maintaining that perl
> code far simpler.
That does not seem like it accomplishes anything from the user's
perspective except to add more points of failure. To name just one:
would you like to debug a problem that stems from a version mismatch
between plperl.so and the external perl files? I wouldn't.
I can see wanting the *source* to be separate files, but having it as a
compiled constant string in the executable seems like the right thing.
Since this language is obviously going to require Perl to be present at
compile time, running a little Perl script to convert the source into a
C literal wouldn't be a problem AFAICS.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Hitoshi Harada | 2009-11-24 17:08:41 | Syntax conflicts in frame clause |
Previous Message | Tim Bunce | 2009-11-24 16:43:30 | Initial refactoring of plperl.c - draft [PATCH] |