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>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bernd Helmle <mailings(at)oopsware(dot)de>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Issues for named/mixed function notation patch |
Date: | 2009-10-07 22:31:16 |
Message-ID: | 162867790910071531q42db84e7j477b5ca20b9491dd@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
2009/10/7 Jeff Davis <pgsql(at)j-davis(dot)com>:
> On Wed, 2009-10-07 at 23:32 +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>> It's same as my origin ideas, much better formulated. It is ok for me.
>
> You indicated that there may be some implementation difficulty if the
> VARIADIC keyword is required for calling using named notation:
>
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-09/msg01792.php
>
> Do you think it would be reasonable to implement?
I thing, so this is possible. But it needs some instructions more. I
would not add some "unnecessary" checks. It needs one cycle over
parameters more (and one array).
* check if last variadic parameter isn't default
* check if last variadic parameter has flag VARIADIC
* check if there are not any other parameter with VARIADIC flag
* some correction in gram.y (procedural code), that allows VARIADIC in
any position when named notation is active.
Pavel
>
> Regards,
> Jeff Davis
>
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jeff Davis | 2009-10-07 22:56:08 | Re: Issues for named/mixed function notation patch |
Previous Message | Pavel Stehule | 2009-10-07 22:25:38 | Re: Issues for named/mixed function notation patch |