Re: generic pseudotype IO functions?

On 1/6/14, 10:29 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> Pseudotype.c/pg_proc.h are slowly growing a number of pretty
>> useless/redundant copy&pasted functions... Most for cases that are
>> pretty damn unlikely to be hit by users not knowing what they do.
> 
> That's hardly the largest cost associated with inventing a new pseudotype.
> Nor are there lots of new pseudotypes coming down the pike, anyway.

If someone wants to do the work, what's the harm in reducing some code
redundancy?

>> What about adding a pseudotype_in/out that just error out with a generic
>> message?
> 
> This will break some of the function sanity checks in opr_sanity,

Then the tests can be changed.