Re: Is TG_NARGS/TG_ARGV just legacy, or what?

Josh Berkus said:
> Folks,
>
> I was just building something and noticing the peculiar structure we've
>  given to arguments to trigger procedures.  Instead of declaring them
> normally, we pass them through the variables TG_NARGS and TG_ARGV[].
> This  is inconsistent with the entire rest of Postgres, as well as
> making it  hard to validate passed constants (e.g. if you pass the
> wrong number of  arguments, you won't know it until execution time).
>
> Is there some sound technical reason not to use the standard argument
> declaration, or is this just something we've overlooked fixing?
>


I'm not sure it's broken ... just different.

It does have the advantage that you can call a single trigger function with
variable argument types/numbers. "Fixing" it would involve an unknown amount
of legacy breakage.

cheers

andrew