From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Nick Rudnick <joerg(dot)rudnick(at)t-online(dot)de>, Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [pgsql-general 2011-1-21:] Are there any projects interested in object functionality? (+ rule bases) |
Date: | 2011-02-01 14:03:27 |
Message-ID: | AANLkTimU+=gr5LeGUYWV+Pc_v_=3giBB2c4iH0oG11iY@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 9:53 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> It would help if you were a bit more specific. Do you mean you want
>> to write something like foo.bar(baz) and have that mean call the bar
>> method of foo and pass it baz as an argument?
>
>> If so, that'd certainly be possible to implement for purposes of a
>> college course, if you're so inclined - after all it's free software -
>> but we'd probably not make such a change to core PG, because right now
>> that would mean call the function bar in schema baz and pass it foo as
>> an argument. We try not to break people's code to when adding
>> nonstandard features.
>
> You would probably have better luck shoehorning in such a feature if the
> syntax looked like this:
>
> (foo).bar(baz)
>
> foo being a value of some type that has methods, and bar being a method
> name. Another possibility is
>
> foo->bar(baz)
>
> I agree with Robert's opinion that it'd be unlikely the project would
> accept such a patch into core, but if you're mainly interested in it
> for research purposes that needn't deter you.
Using an arrow definitely seems less problematic than using a dot.
Dot means too many things already.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Pavel Stehule | 2011-02-01 14:06:00 | Re: [pgsql-general 2011-1-21:] Are there any projects interested in object functionality? (+ rule bases) |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2011-02-01 14:00:03 | Re: Transaction-scope advisory locks |