Re: @(#) Mordred Labs advisory 0x0001: Buffer overflow in

From: "Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD" <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at>
To: "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Justin Clift" <justin(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Christopher Kings-Lynne" <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, "Vince Vielhaber" <vev(at)michvhf(dot)com>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: @(#) Mordred Labs advisory 0x0001: Buffer overflow in
Date: 2002-08-21 17:39:12
Message-ID: 46C15C39FEB2C44BA555E356FBCD6FA4961E5A@m0114.s-mxs.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


> > I did not mean visible, I meant useable, like in
> > create function xx(any) returns text ...;
> > If that is possible, what is the difference to opaque ?
>
> "any" will have the same behavior that "opaque" used to have, yes.

Ok, now I vote, that you don't implement "any" and use "opaque".
I don't think we want two types that do the same thing.
Is it that you like the name "any" more than "opaque" ?
I am confused.

Andreas

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Neil Conway 2002-08-21 17:41:32 Re: @(#)Mordred Labs advisory 0x0002: Buffer overflow in PostgreSQL
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2002-08-21 17:31:26 Re: @(#)Mordred Labs advisory 0x0003: Buffer overflow in