Re: variadic function support

From: "Pavel Stehule" <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: "Jeff Davis" <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>
Cc: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Andrew Dunstan" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, pgsql-patches <pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: variadic function support
Date: 2008-07-13 05:52:11
Message-ID: 162867790807122252ta082f21t3b9af19aebc34cc6@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches

Hello

2008/7/13 Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>:
> On Thu, 2008-06-26 at 17:03 +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>> this is third variant with variadic argumen as scalar. But I still
>> strongly prefer second variant with conformance declared variadic
>> array with used array variable.
>

you checked second or third variant? There are two variants still.
Regards
Pavel Stehule

Please, Tom, can you choose one?

> This version allows you to declare two functions "foo(variadic numeric)"
> and "foo(numeric)", and then if you do a "\df foo" the backend crashes.
>
> Also, you didn't update an error string:
>
> "variadic argument isn't an array" should (in this version) be something
> like: "can't find array type for variadic parameter type %s"
>
> I suggest a slightly different wording for the following error messages:
>
> "aggregate function has variadic argument" -> "variadic parameters not
> supported for aggregate functions"
>
> and
>
> "variadic argument isn't last function's argument" -> "variadic
> parameter must be the last parameter to the function"
>
> Those are just suggested wordings.
>
> Regards,
> Jeff Davis
>
>

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-patches by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jeff Davis 2008-07-13 06:06:04 Re: variadic function support
Previous Message Jeff Davis 2008-07-13 05:44:34 Re: variadic function support