From: Elvis Pranskevichus <el@prans.net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Allow anonymous rowtypes in function return column definition
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2019 18:35:25 -0500
Message-ID: <5580575.Bn2KaDtcXf@hammer.magicstack.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <19439.1548889181@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <11038447.kQ5A9Uj5xi@hammer.magicstack.net>
<1691096.MngoxCRQ0q@hammer.magicstack.net>
<19439.1548889181@sss.pgh.pa.us>
On Wednesday, January 30, 2019 5:59:41 PM EST Tom Lane wrote:
> I still found this pretty disjointed. After a bit of thought I
> propose the attached reformulation, which has the callers just tell
> the routines which types to allow explicitly, with the justification
> comments living at the call sites instead of within the routines.
This is a much better formulation, thank you!
Elvis
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: el@prans.net, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Allow anonymous rowtypes in function return column definition
In-Reply-To: <5580575.Bn2KaDtcXf@hammer.magicstack.net>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox