Re: Add support for SRF and returning composites to pl/tcl

Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com> writes:
> Hrm, I completely spaced on the fact that composite returns are
> essentially the same thing as trigger returns. ISTM we should be able to
> use the same code for both. IIRC those magic elements could end up in
> any SPI result, so that handling certainly needs to be the same.

> Have you had a chance to look at this or should I?

As things stand in HEAD, the behavior is about the same, but the error
messages are not --- in one case they mention triggers and of course the
other doesn't. There are a couple of other minor things in the way of
unifying the two hunks of code, so I concluded it probably wasn't worth
the trouble. But feel free to take another look if it bugs you.

regards, tom lane