2012/3/8 Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>:
> On tor, 2012-03-08 at 10:49 +0100, Albe Laurenz wrote:
>> Actually, I did when I reviewed the patch the first time round.
>> I think that the checks implemented are clearly good and useful,
>> since any problem reported will lead to an error at runtime if
>> a certain code path in the function is taken.
>
> Shouldn't the validator just reject the function in those cases?
>
Validator check syntax only (and cannot do more, because there should
not be dependency between functions). But it doesn't verify if table
exists, if table has refereed columns, if number of expressions in
raise statement is equal to number of substitute symbols ...
Regards
Pavel