Re: Python 3.1 support

From: James Pye <lists(at)jwp(dot)name>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Python 3.1 support
Date: 2009-11-19 20:12:34
Message-ID: 7C7670E6-3CB1-46BE-89C9-7226AF2BFF19@jwp.name
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Nov 19, 2009, at 11:32 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> But you wouldn't, for example, get away with breaking SQL (or even
> improving it incompatibly) to facilitate a better elog.

This doesn't fit the situation.

I'm not breaking PL/Python. I'm trying to add PL/Python3. =)

> I think of a PL/Python function as a Python script file stored
> in the database.

For Python, I think that's a mistake. Python scripts are independent applications.

[tho, I think this does illuminate our perspectives...]

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Boszormenyi Zoltan 2009-11-19 20:32:51 Re: Question about ECPGset_noind_null() and ECPGis_noind_null()
Previous Message Andrew Dunstan 2009-11-19 19:46:50 Re: Question about ECPGset_noind_null() and ECPGis_noind_null()