| From: | "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "Pg Hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Cleanup of PLpgSQL_recfield |
| Date: | 2008-11-04 23:17:40 |
| Message-ID: | 36e682920811041517lf3482cbmc06765a4877a1262@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 3:57 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> I am not real sure why the code is inconsistent about spelling the
> second field's name differently in some of the structs, but it seems
> like a bad idea --- as you've demonstrated, it invites confusion.
> What would probably be better is a patch to rename exprno, rfno, etc
> to all be called dno to make this connection more obvious.
Attached. Passed regressions and basic testing.
--
Jonah H. Harris, Senior DBA
myYearbook.com
| Attachment | Content-Type | Size |
|---|---|---|
| plpgsql_datumnaming_cleanup.patch | application/octet-stream | 16.4 KB |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Emmanuel Cecchet | 2008-11-04 23:50:24 | Re: Transactions and temp tables |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2008-11-04 22:43:11 | Re: Updates of SE-PostgreSQL 8.4devel patches (r1168) |