Re: splitting plpython into smaller parts
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: splitting plpython into smaller parts |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 6015.1323963013@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: splitting plpython into smaller parts (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com> writes: > Excerpts from Peter Eisentraut's message of jue dic 15 12:00:13 -0300 2011: >> How to people feel about naming the files (as proposed) >> >> ! OBJS = plpython.o plpython_io.o plpython_procedure.o plpython_exec.o \ >> ! plpython_plpy.o plpython_spi.o plpython_result.o plpython_cursor.o \ >> ! plpython_plan.o plpython_subtransaction.o plpython_functions.o \ >> ! plpython_elog.o >> >> vs. say >> >> ! OBJS = main.o io.o procedure.o exec.o plpy.o spi.o result.o cursor.o \ >> ! plan.o subtransaction.o functions.o elog.o >> >> ? > I find the extra prefix unnecessary and ugly; if we had to had a > prefix, I'd choose a shorter one (maybe "py" instead of "plpython_"). +1 for a prefix, mainly because the shorter names duplicate some names already in use elsewhere in our tree. But I agree with Alvaro that "py" would be sufficient. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: