From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, "Vladimir V(dot) Zolotych" <gsmith(at)eurocom(dot)od(dot)ua>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Lisp as procedural language |
Date: | 2001-05-07 18:06:43 |
Message-ID: | 200105071806.f47I6hk18100@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Can someone explain why we have a lisp.sgml file in our docs? Seems it
descripes a 3rd party Emacs interface. I don't think we should start
distributing docs for software we don't distribute. Can I remove it?
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> > This must have been an artifact from the time when part of the Postgres
> > system was written in Lisp. A Lisp procedural language never actually
> > existed in PostgreSQL.
>
> [ Digs in archives... ] The pg_language entry that Vladimir refers to
> was still present as late as Postgres 6.5 --- but I agree that it must
> have been vestigial long before that. Certainly, at one time large
> chunks of Postgres *were* written in Lisp, and I imagine that the
> pg_language entry did something useful when that was true. But it was
> dead code in Postgres 4.2 (1994), which is the oldest source I have;
> there is no Lisp code remaining in 4.2.
>
> It'd theoretically be possible to support Lisp in the same way as we
> currently support Tcl, Perl, etc. The hard part is to find a suitable
> interpreter that is designed to be dynamically linked into other
> applications. Perl still hasn't got that quite right, and I imagine
> it's an even more foreign idea for most Lisp systems...
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(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 | Bruce Momjian | 2001-05-07 18:11:37 | Re: Re: File system performance and pg_xlog (More info) |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2001-05-07 17:37:45 | Re: Isn't pg_statistic a security hole? |