Michael Graff <explorer@flame.org> writes:
> The first posting was held for moderator approval, which never
> happened, so I'll try this again after first subscribing.
As I recall, Paul Vixie's first attempt at this was rejected because it
undid a lot of painfully-arrived-at decisions about the I/O behavior of
these datatypes. You need to tell us exactly what you did about those
issues. (No, I don't have time to read the code to find out...)
You also need to supply some documentation updates --- code updates
alone are incomplete. I'd not have had to ask the question above if
this patch included proper documentation. The "Network Address Data
Types" and "Network Address Type Functions" pages both need to be fixed.
Some additions to the inet regression test would seem in order, too.
regards, tom lane