From: | Pavel Stehule <pavel(dot)stehule(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov> |
Cc: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
Subject: | Re: Controlling changes in plpgsql variable resolution |
Date: | 2009-10-19 17:17:52 |
Message-ID: | 162867790910191017m75943cf1p244742edea9fbfea@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
2009/10/19 Kevin Grittner <Kevin(dot)Grittner(at)wicourts(dot)gov>:
> "David E. Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> I'd be in favor of a GUC that I could turn on to throw an error
>> when there's an ambiguity.
>
> I would consider hiding one definition with another very bad form, so
> I would prefer to have plpgsql throw an error when that happens. I
> don't particularly care whether that is the only supported behavior or
> whether there's a GUC to control it, or what its default is, if
> present.
>
ambiguous identifiers is probably the top reason of some plpgsql's
mysterious errors. More times I found wrong code - sometime really
important (some security checks). I never found good code with
ambiguous identifiers - so for me, exception is good. But - there will
be lot of working applications that contains this hidden bug - and
works "well". So it could be a problem. GUC should be a solution.
Pavel
> -Kevin
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Merlin Moncure | 2009-10-19 17:37:25 | Re: Controlling changes in plpgsql variable resolution |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-10-19 17:16:36 | Re: Rejecting weak passwords |