Re: Last call for comments: fmgr rewrite [LONG]
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Last call for comments: fmgr rewrite [LONG] |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 12459.958968500@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Last call for comments: fmgr rewrite [LONG] (Chris Bitmead <chrisb@nimrod.itg.telstra.com.au>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Chris Bitmead <chrisb@nimrod.itg.telstra.com.au> writes: >> Possibly, or else I'm missing yours. What would a stub code generator >> do for us that the proposed GETARG and RETURN macros won't do? > Only that it might be slightly cleaner code, but you're probably right. > I just have experience doing this sort of thing and know that manually > grabbing each argument can be painful with hundreds of functions. The conversion is going to be a major pain in the rear, no doubt about that :-(. I suspect it may take us more than one release cycle to get rid of all the old-style functions in the distribution, and we perhaps will never be able to drop support for old-style dynamically loaded functions. OTOH, I also have experience with code preprocessors and they're no fun either in an open-source environment. You gotta port the preprocessor to everywhere you intend to run, make it robust against a variety of coding styles, etc etc. Don't really want to go there. On the third hand, you've got the germ of an idea: maybe a really quick-and-dirty script would be worth writing to do some of the basic conversion editing. It wouldn't have to be bulletproof because we would go over the results by hand anyway, but it could help... regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: