Re: Coping with 'C' vs 'newC' function language names

'Marko Kreen' wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Nov 15, 2000 at 02:42:24PM +0100, Zeugswetter Andreas SB wrote:
> >
> > > > We need the 7.0 style for compatibility with other DB's. Postgres was
> > > > "the" pioneer in this area, but similar functionality is now available in other DB's.
> > >
> > > Could you explain?  PostgreSQL cant be compatible in C level, why
> > > the SQL compatibility?  (I mean the LANGUAGE 'C' specifically)
> >
> > C code compatible with Informix:
> >
> > int32 intadd (int32 a, int32 b)
> > {
> >       return a + b;
> > }
> >
> > This is the same code that was standard in PostgreSQL 7.0
> 
> Hmm, I have not actually researched if 7.1 supports 7.0 'C' code
> or not.  Butthe 'newC' is anyway incompatible with 'C'. So:
> 
> * CREATE FUNCTION .. AS 'foo.so', .. LANGUAGE 'C';
> 
>   creates the old¬ 'C', 7.0 and ifnormix compatible funtion.
> 
>   And it is documented as deprecated, for-compatibility.
> 
> * CREATE FUNCTION .. FROM LIBRARY 'foo.so.2' ..{name in .so}
>   [WITH VERSION abi_ver]
>      {the actual syntax needs polishing}
> 
>   creates by default the newC style fn's
>   but WITH VERSION 0 (e.g.) you can create the old style
>   functions too.
> 
> Comments?

I generally like the idea, but I am working on a text index/search
project that will rely heavily on C interfacing with Postgres.

I'm not sure what "NewC" is, nor do I understand what problem it is
attempting to fix.


-- 
http://www.mohawksoft.com