From: | Corey Huinker <corey(dot)huinker(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Add generate_series(date, date) and generate_series(date, date, integer) |
Date: | 2016-01-25 15:11:19 |
Message-ID: | CADkLM=cYKYGH9yz4RnSPtmN4a=ZLM4zBppEosyqY=p_z35rsow@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Jan 25, 2016 at 2:07 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Corey Huinker <corey(dot)huinker(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> > Incidentally, is there a reason behind the tendency of internal functions
> > to avoid parameter defaults in favor of multiple pg_proc entries?
>
> Yes: you can't specify defaults in pg_proc.h.
>
> We work around that where absolutely necessary, see the last part of
> system_views.sql. But it's messy enough, and bug-prone enough, to be
> better avoided --- for example, it's very easy for the redeclaration
> in system_view.sql to forget a STRICT or other similar marking.
>
> Personally I'd say that every one of the existing cases that simply has
> a default for the last argument was a bad idea, and would better have
> been done in the traditional way with two pg_proc.h entries.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
...which answers my follow up question where make_interval was getting the
defaults I saw in the table but not the .h file. Thanks!
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Robert Haas | 2016-01-25 15:45:32 | Re: Releasing in September |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2016-01-25 15:09:23 | Re: Releasing in September |