Re: review: CHECK FUNCTION statement
От | Pavel Stehule |
---|---|
Тема | Re: review: CHECK FUNCTION statement |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAFj8pRBTCA=A_QR8ry0k3+zDLM=HPDP8Gd3YBmKkSuntJ-1UUg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: review: CHECK FUNCTION statement ("Albe Laurenz" <laurenz.albe@wien.gv.at>) |
Ответы |
Re: review: CHECK FUNCTION statement
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Hello updated version changes: * CHECK FUNCTION ALL; is enabled - in this case functions from pg_catalog schema are ignored I looked on parser, and I didn't other changes there - IN SCHEMA, FOR ROLE are used more time there, so our usage will be consistent Regards Pavel 2011/12/7 Albe Laurenz <laurenz.albe@wien.gv.at>: > Pavel Stehule wrote: >>> The syntax error messages are still inadequate; all I can get is >>> 'syntax error at or near "%s"'. They should be more detailed. >> >> this system is based on error messages that generates a plpgsql engine >> or bison engine. I can correct only a few percent from these messages >> :( >> >> internally I didn't wrote a compiler or plpgsql checker - this is just >> tool that can emit some plpgsql interpret subprocess - and when these >> subprocesses raises exceptions, then takes their messages. > > I see. > >>> I think that at least the documentation should be improved before >>> I am ready to set this as "ready for committer". >> >> please, can you send a correction to documentation or error messages? >> >> I am not able to write documentation > > I'll give it a try. > > Yours, > Laurenz Albe
Вложения
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: