| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD" <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at> |
| 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: | 2002-08-20 20:21:50 |
| Message-ID: | 6367.1029874910@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD" <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at> writes:
>> "Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD" <ZeugswetterA(at)spardat(dot)at> writes:
>>> Hard to say what is good for those names imho, don't like
>>> "anytype" :-(
>>
>> How about "any"? It's a reserved word per SQL99, I think.
> I would actually stick to opaque in that case, already used in other db's.
I want to change the name because (a) we are changing the semantics,
(b) we can't throw notices for opaque if we keep it as a valid choice.
>>> Maybe "anyarray" instead of "anyarraytype".
>>
>> That would match with "any".
> I thought you wanted it separate ?
I meant that if the one name is "any", then making the other "anyarray"
(ie, both without "type" on the end) is consistent.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 2002-08-20 20:30:07 | Re: bison news |
| Previous Message | Zeugswetter Andreas SB SD | 2002-08-20 20:17:28 | Re: @(#) Mordred Labs advisory 0x0001: Buffer overflow in |