From: | Nathan Myers <ncm(at)zembu(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [rfc] new CREATE FUNCTION (and more) |
Date: | 2000-11-16 20:59:39 |
Message-ID: | 20001116125939.A12682@store.zembu.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Nov 16, 2000 at 11:20:58AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> I don't have any great love for the names 'C' and 'newC' either, but
> unless we are willing to break backward-compatibility of function
> declarations in 7.1, I think we are stuck with those names or ones
> isomorphic to them.
>
> In the long run, it seems that it'd be a good idea to embed function
> declaration info straight into a loadable module, per Philip's idea
> of a special function or your idea of a table.
Until somebody implements Philip's idea, a much simpler approach could
obviate the whole issue:
- Keep the name 'C' for both old-style and new-style module declarations.
- Require that new-style modules define a distinguished symbol, such as
"int __postgresql_call_7_1;".
The module loader can look for symbols that start with "__postgresql_call"
and adjust automatically, or report an error. This
- Breaks no backward compatibility,
- Defines a clear method for handling future changes, to prevent this
problem from arising again,
- Creates no particular inconvenience for writers of modules, and
- Might be very easy to implement.
Nathan Myers
ncm(at)zembu(dot)com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Mikheev, Vadim | 2000-11-16 21:11:54 | RE: RE: [COMMITTERS] pgsql/src/backend/access/transam ( xact.c xlog.c) |
Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2000-11-16 20:57:57 | Re: RE: [COMMITTERS] pgsql/src/backend/access/transam ( xact.c xlog.c) |