Re: Documentation about PL transforms
От | Peter Eisentraut |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Documentation about PL transforms |
Дата | |
Msg-id | efbdcf7e-9b39-631b-011a-b75cb58e1dd3@enterprisedb.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Documentation about PL transforms (Chapman Flack <chap@anastigmatix.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: Documentation about PL transforms
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On 05.02.22 00:55, Chapman Flack wrote: > I'm thinking plhandler.sgml is the only place that really needs to be > said; readers looking up CREATE TRANSFORM and using an existing PL that > supports it don't need to know how the sausage is made. (Maybe it is > worth mentioning there, though, that it isn't possible to develop > transforms for an arbitrary PL unless that PL applies transforms.) makes sense > I noticed the CREATE TRANSFORM docs show the argument list as > (argument_type [, ...]) even though check_transform_function will reject > any argument list of length other than 1 or with type other than internal. > Is that an overly-generic way to show the syntax, or is that a style > with precedent elsewhere in the docs? That could be corrected. > As long as a PL handler has the sole responsibility for invoking > its transforms, I wonder if it would make sense to allow a PL to > define what its transforms should look like, maybe replacing > check_transform_function with a transform_validator for the PL. > I'm not proposing such a patch here, but I am willing to prepare > one for plhandler.sgml and maybe pltemplate.c documenting the current > situation, if nobody tells me I'm wrong about something here. Maybe. This kind of thing would mostly be driven what a PL wants in actual practice, and then how that could be generalized to many/all PLs.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: