| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Craig Ringer <craig(at)postnewspapers(dot)com(dot)au>, Igor <igor(at)carcass(dot)ath(dot)cx>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: server-side extension in c++ |
| Date: | 2010-06-01 03:05:11 |
| Message-ID: | 24379.1275361511@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> Personally I would reduce this section to
>> Don't.
> Well, I would have avoided this mine-trap except we have this 9.0
> release note item:
> Allow use of <productname>C++</> functions in backend code (Kurt
> Harriman, Peter Eisentraut)
I'd be interested to see a section like this written by someone who'd
actually done a nontrivial C++ extension and lived to tell the tale.
As is, this is so incomplete that my opinion is it's worse than useless.
It gives people the impression that writing an extension in C++ will
be easy. When they find out it isn't, we'll get the blame.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2010-06-01 03:06:14 | Re: server-side extension in c++ |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2010-06-01 02:55:00 | Re: server-side extension in c++ |