Is TG_NARGS/TG_ARGV just legacy, or what?

From: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Is TG_NARGS/TG_ARGV just legacy, or what?
Date: 2006-03-04 22:44:04
Message-ID: 200603041444.04650.josh@agliodbs.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Folks,

I was just building something and noticing the peculiar structure we've
given to arguments to trigger procedures. Instead of declaring them
normally, we pass them through the variables TG_NARGS and TG_ARGV[]. This
is inconsistent with the entire rest of Postgres, as well as making it
hard to validate passed constants (e.g. if you pass the wrong number of
arguments, you won't know it until execution time).

Is there some sound technical reason not to use the standard argument
declaration, or is this just something we've overlooked fixing?

--
--Josh

Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Josh Berkus 2006-03-04 23:47:27 Re: Is TG_NARGS/TG_ARGV just legacy, or what?
Previous Message Tom Lane 2006-03-04 22:27:55 Re: Not so happy with psql's new multiline behavior