From: | Michael Meskes <meskes(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | Boszormenyi Zoltan <zb(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
Cc: | Michael Meskes <meskes(at)postgresql(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Hans-Juergen Schoenig <hs(at)cybertec(dot)at> |
Subject: | Re: ECPG support for struct in INTO list |
Date: | 2009-08-07 10:58:56 |
Message-ID: | 20090807105856.GB23682@feivel.credativ.lan |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Aug 07, 2009 at 11:48:33AM +0200, Boszormenyi Zoltan wrote:
> Which isn't exactly a good programming habit.
I couldn't agree more.
> In the above code local, in-scope variables are also replaced
> with ECPG_informix_set_var() and _get_var() calls.
> Totally unnecessary, or totally necessary even in non-compatible
> mode, depending on which leg I stand on. If you move the
> struct/union unrolling into adjust_informix() and handle arrays,
> ECPGdump_a_struct() won't be needed then.
Yeah, right, and you also add this hack to all applications. No.
> Because that example contradicts all sensible programming habits.
> (Well, what is "sensible" is different between people, so don't take it
> personal.)
Hey, don't blame me! Informix uses this feature to some extend, this is why it
got implemented. If you look into the source code you will see this:
* This breaks standard and leads to some very dangerous programming.
* Since they do, we have to work around and accept their syntax as well.
* But we will do so ONLY in Informix mode.
Michael
--
Michael Meskes
Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org)
Michael at BorussiaFan dot De, Meskes at (Debian|Postgresql) dot Org
ICQ: 179140304, AIM/Yahoo/Skype: michaelmeskes, Jabber: meskes(at)jabber(dot)org
Go VfL Borussia! Go SF 49ers! Use Debian GNU/Linux! Use PostgreSQL!
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Boszormenyi Zoltan | 2009-08-07 11:05:33 | Re: Split-up ECPG patches |
Previous Message | Michael Meskes | 2009-08-07 10:55:20 | Re: Split-up ECPG patches |