Re: actualised funcs typmod patch

Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> 2009/11/17 Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>:
>> My point is that if we release 8.5 with these semantics (which as far
>> as I can tell were not designed, but just fell out of what made for the
>> shortest patch) then we'll be stuck with them thereafter.

> We could to talk about it now. We are not hurry. But I would to see
> some progress in this area in next two months. This patch is simple
> and doesn't create any new rules or doesn't change behave.

What do you mean it doesn't change the behavior? It establishes a
specific set of behaviors for functions with non-default typmods in
their arguments. If we just apply whatever was the easiest thing to
implement, without any discussion, we are very likely to regret it
later.

It might be that what you've done is all fine, but I'd like some
discussion and consensus on the issues. Submitting an entirely
documentation-free patch is not the way to establish consensus.

regards, tom lane