Re: [HACKERS] Consistently catch errors from Python _New() functions
От
Tom Lane
Тема
Re: [HACKERS] Consistently catch errors from Python _New() functions
Дата
Msg-id
9477.1510939000@sss.pgh.pa.us
Ответ на
[HACKERS] Consistently catch errors from Python _New() functions (Peter Eisentraut)
Список
Дерево обсуждения
[HACKERS] Consistently catch errors from Python _New() functions Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>
Re: [HACKERS] Consistently catch errors from Python _New() functions Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: [HACKERS] Consistently catch errors from Python _New() functions Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>
Re: [HACKERS] Consistently catch errors from Python _New() functions Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: [HACKERS] Consistently catch errors from Python _New() functions Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>
Peter Eisentraut writes: > While reviewing some unrelated code, I noticed that we are handling > error conditions from Python API functions such as PyList_New() and > PyDict_New() in pretty random ways or not at all. Here is a patch to > fix that. This needs some adjustment in the wake of 687f096ea. I'm confused by the places that change PLy_elog calls to pass NULL: - PLy_elog(ERROR, "could not create globals"); + PLy_elog(ERROR, NULL); How is that an improvement? Otherwise it looks reasonable. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления