Re: CREATE LANGUAGE

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> Is there a reason why it's CREATE LANGUAGE 'string' and not CREATE
> LANGUAGE "ident"? I'd like to allow both to make it consistent with the
> other create commands. SQL also uses identifier syntax for language
> names.

Seems reasonable to me. Don't overlook the CREATE FUNCTION ... LANGUAGE
clause, too.

> Also, what is LANCOMPILER for? If it's just a comment we ought to use
> pg_description.

I think the original idea might have been to someday support
auto-building of compiled functions. (Though a setup allowing one to
invoke make with suitable arguments would probably be far more useful
than a bare compiler name.) I'm not in a hurry to rip it out until we
have designed such a facility, anyway. There are a lot of vestigial
features in Postgres that we might someday resurrect/implement. I tend
to view those things as TODO markers, not stuff to rip out to save a
byte or two.

regards, tom lane