| From: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: RfD: more powerful "any" types |
| Date: | 2009-09-09 17:28:32 |
| Message-ID: | 8EEEF818-32D8-46E7-A795-46F245CE7E1A@kineticode.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sep 9, 2009, at 10:22 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Well, only if you write your functions in C. I'd like to be able to
>> write sprintf() in PL/pgSQL. Or PL/Perl, for that matter.
>
> I think you're confusing the point with a secondary issue, which is
> what
> access we provide to these pseudotypes in PLs. To write sprintf in a
> PL, you'd at least need the ability to cast "any" to text. I guess
> you
> can do that with anyelement, though, so maybe there is nothing much
> here
> except an overly restrictive safety check.
Yes, exactly.
Best,
David
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2009-09-09 17:29:18 | Re: RfD: more powerful "any" types |
| Previous Message | David E. Wheeler | 2009-09-09 17:27:57 | Re: RfD: more powerful "any" types |