Re: check function patch

Hello

there are other version related to your last comments. I removed magic
constants.

This is not merged with Peter's changes. I'll do it tomorrow. Probably
there will be some bigger changes in header files, but this can be
next step.

Regards

Pavel

2012/3/8 Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>:
> Hi guys,
>
> sorry, I'm stuck in an unfamiliar webmail.
>
> I checked the patch Petr just posted.
> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2012-03/msg00482.php
>
> I have two comments.  First, I notice that the documentation changes has two
> places that describe the columns that a function checker returns -- one in
> the "plhandler" page, another in the create language page.  I think it
> should exist only on one of those, probably the create language one; and the
> plhandler page should just say "the checker should comply with the
> specification at <create language>". Or something like that.   Also, the
> fact that the tuple description is prose makes it hard to read; I think it
> should be a table -- three columns: name, type, description.
>
> My second comment is that the checker tuple descriptor seems to have changed
> in the code.  In the patch I posted, the FunctionCheckerDesc() function was
> not static; in this patch it has been made static.  But what I intended was
> that the other places that need a descriptor for anything would use this
> function to get one, instead of building them by hand.  There are two such
> places currently, one in CreateProceduralLanguage. I think this should be
> simply walking the tupdesc->attrs array to create the arrays it needs for
> the ProcedureCreate call -- shoud be a rather easy change.  The other place
> is plpgsql's report_error(). Honestly I don't like this function at all due
> to the way it's assuming what the tupledesc looks like.  I'm not sure how to
> improve it, however, but it seems wrong to me.

One reason to do this this
> way (i.e. centralize knowledge of what the tupdesc looks like) is that
> otherwise they get out of sync -- I notice that CreateProcedureLanguage now
> knows that there are 15 columns while the other places believe there are
> only 11.
>
>