| From: | Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | jwieck(at)debis(dot)com |
| Cc: | darcy(at)druid(dot)net, taral(at)mail(dot)utexas(dot)edu, tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us, pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] A small problem with the new inet and cidr types |
| Date: | 1998-11-03 16:38:03 |
| Message-ID: | 199811031638.LAA08363@candle.pha.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> Not calling a function if one of it's arguments is NULL?
> Isn't NULL a legal value?
>
> I know that the function manager interface is damned stupid
> in the case of NULL's. Some of the interface functions pass
> isNull as in/out value and some do not. And the in value only
> tells if any of the arguments are NULL, not which of them. It
> hit me when building PL/pgSQL and PL/Tcl.
>
> Let's redesign the function call interface and define that
> any function has to handle NULL arguments properly. Yes, I
> know what that means :-).
>
Added to TODO list:
* redesign the function call interface to handle NULLs better
--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | D'Arcy J.M. Cain | 1998-11-03 16:57:36 | Re: [HACKERS] A small problem with the new inet and cidr typesg |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 1998-11-03 15:46:14 | Re: [HACKERS] A small problem with the new inet and cidr typesg |