Re: RfD: more powerful "any" types
От | Pavel Stehule |
---|---|
Тема | Re: RfD: more powerful "any" types |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 162867790909101308o6661e26bk7e375326556423e4@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: RfD: more powerful "any" types (Hannu Krosing <hannu@krosing.net>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
2009/9/10 Hannu Krosing <hannu@krosing.net>: > On Thu, 2009-09-10 at 21:30 +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote: >> 2009/9/10 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>: >> > Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> writes: >> >> 2009/9/10 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>: >> >>> 1. Allow the existing "any" pseudotype as an input argument type for PLs. >> >>> (AFAICS this is simple and painless; about the only question is whether >> >>> we want to keep using the name "any", which because of conflicting with >> >>> a reserved word would always need the double quotes.) >> > >> >> I thing so this is possible - I see only one critical point - you >> >> cannot validate source in validation time. >> > >> > How's it any different from anyelement? >> >> true, if I remember well, there is substitution from anyelement to int? >> >> maybe from this perspective can be good to separate polymorphic types >> to some kinds: >> >> any - really unknown type - there is possible only check on null or >> not null (and maybe some basic operations). >> anytext - any value (substituted to text) in validation time >> anynumeric - any value (substitued to integer) in validation time. > > I think that way madness lies. > > then we should have anyXXX types for almost any subsets of types > > anytime , anygeom, anypointpair, anymorethantwopaintgeom, etc... true :( > > better have a (possibility of) validation at compile time and > validation/error-throwing at runtime - the latter is needed anyway. > I have very bad experience with late validation - like plpgsql did. It could to throw some exception too late (in production) - so this is some way, where we have to be carefully. It easy to write dynamic system - but this system should be dangerous in production. When I started with PostgreSQL I disliked hard typing system, now I love it - lot of things are predictable. > Unless we are going to implement CHECK constraints for function > arguments and then use constraint exclusion for selecting the correct > function ;) > >> regards >> Pavel Stehule >> >> > >> > regards, tom lane >> > >> > >
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: