Re: Issues for named/mixed function notation patch

2009/9/28 Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com>:
> 2009/9/28 Jeff Davis <pgsql@j-davis.com>:
>> On Mon, 2009-09-28 at 18:23 +0200, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>>> when I though about control, I found so syntax with mandatory VARIADIC
>>> is difficult implementable. So probably the most feasible solution for
>>> this moment is to discard a variadic functions from set of functions
>>> that are callable with named notation. So I thing we are in tune, and
>>> I am going to update patch.
>>
>> Sounds good. I am looking at the code, and there's a part I don't
>> understand:
>>
>> In FuncnameGetCandidates():
>>  /*
>>   * Wait with apply proargidxs on args. Detection ambigouos needs
>>   * consistent args (based on proargs). Store proargidxs for later
>>   * use.
>>   */
>>   newResult->proargidxs = proargidxs;

proargidxs is used more times in func_get_detail function

a) for reordering pgproc->args to actual params order
b) for numbering (filling) NamedArgExpr->position based on known best candidate

>
>>
>> But after calling FuncnameGetCandidates (the only place where fargnames
>> is non-NIL), you immediately re-assign to best_candidate->args. What
>> happens between those two places, and why can't it happen in
>> FuncnameGetCandidates?
>



> I am not sure - I have to look to code, but if I remember well, there
> are same arrays, with same values, but the field are different order.
> One is related to pgproc and second to real params. But I have to
> check code again.
>>
>> Also, you should consistently pass NIL when you mean an empty list, but
>> sometimes you pass NULL to FuncnameGetCandidates().
>
> It's bug, where is it?

I fixed it

So I dropped variadic functions from mixed/named notation and little
bit modified documentation. Please, can some native English speaker
look on documentation?

Patch attached

Pavel

>
> Regards
> Pavel
>
>>
>> Regards,
>>        Jeff Davis
>>
>>
>>
>