Re: [HACKERS] A small problem with the new inet and cidr types

From: "Thomas G(dot) Lockhart" <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>
To: Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: jwieck(at)debis(dot)com, 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: 1998-11-04 02:50:46
Message-ID: 363FC106.9E4893C6@alumni.caltech.edu
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> * redesign the function call interface to handle NULLs better

I was planning on looking at this for v6.5, at least in the context of
trying to solve the problem of returning NULL for pass-by-value types.

We should have some discussion of pass-by-value vs. pass-by-reference
and whether it is worth having both mechanisms for common data types. As
it is, functions which return int2 or int4 cannot return NULL because
there is no way to represent that with these types. I was thinking of
implementing true smallint/integer pass-by-reference types to clean this
up.

- Tom

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message A James Lewis 1998-11-04 03:07:50 Re: [HACKERS] Warning!!
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 1998-11-04 02:40:02 Re: [HACKERS] Warning!!