Re: Attention PL authors: want to be listed in template

Tom Lane wrote:

>For instance, if you think you might want a validator later,
>you can set up a no-op validator procedure today, and then the template
>doesn't need to change when you make the validator do something.
>Similarly, you could future-proof yourself against adding a trusted (or
>untrusted) variant by putting in some stubs now.
>
>
>  
>

Only necessary for one release, right?

Anyway, clearly there are cases where a validator make no sense or very 
little sense (pl/sh and pl/{j,java} spring to mind).

cheers

andrew