Re: Error-safe user functions

On 2022-12-08 Th 17:57, Tom Lane wrote:
> Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
>> On 2022-12-08 16:00:10 -0500, Robert Haas wrote:
>>> Yes, I think just putting "struct Node;" in as many places as
>>> necessary is the way to go. Or even:
>> +1
> OK, here's a v5 that does it like that.
>
> I've spent a little time pushing ahead on other input functions,
> and realized that my original plan to require a pre-encoded typmod
> for these test functions was not very user-friendly. So in v5
> you can write something like
>
> pg_input_is_valid('1234.567', 'numeric(7,4)')
>
> 0004 attached finishes up the remaining core numeric datatypes
> (int*, float*, numeric). I ripped out float8in_internal_opt_error
> in favor of a function that uses the new APIs.

Great, that takes care of some of the relatively urgent work.

>
> 0005 converts contrib/cube, which I chose to tackle partly because
> I'd already touched it in 0004, partly because it seemed like a
> good idea to verify that extension modules wouldn't have any
> problems with this apprach, and partly because I wondered whether
> an input function that uses a Bison/Flex parser would have big
> problems getting converted. This one didn't, anyway.

Cool

>
> Given that this additional experimentation didn't find any holes
> in the API design, I think this is pretty much ready to go.
>
>

I will look in more detail tomorrow, but it LGTM on a quick look.

cheers

andrew

--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com