Re: Initial review of xslt with no limits patch

Mike Fowler <mike(at)mlfowler(dot)com> writes:
> On 06/08/10 17:50, Pavel Stehule wrote:
>> attached updated patch with regression test

> Bravely ignoring the quotation/varidic/<favourite_scheme_here>
> conversations, I've taken a look at the patch as is. Thanks to Tom's
> input I can now correctly drive the function. I can also report that
> code is now behaving in the expected way.

I've gone ahead and applied this patch, since the subsequent discussion
seemed to be getting *extremely* far afield from the expressed intent
of the patch, and nobody had pointed out a reason not to fix the
number-of-parameters limitation.

I think we have a few TODO items here:

* Invent ... and document ... an API that permits safe assembly of a
parameter list from non-constant (and perhaps untrustworthy) values.

* Fix xslt_process' failure to report (some?) errors detected by libxslt.

* Move the functionality to a less deprecated place.

None of these are within the scope of the current patch though.

regards, tom lane