Re: Pl/Python -- current maintainer?

[Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)skype(dot)net>]

Ühel kenal päeval, L, 2006-02-25 kell 10:09, kirjutas Tino Wildenhain:
> James Robinson schrieb:
> > I see neilc has hacked on it very recently to reduce memory leaks. I 
> > take that as both good and bad signs.
> > 
> > We're a [ small ] python shop, and would be most interested in being 
> > able to simplify our life through doing some things in plpython  instead
> > of pl/pgsql where appropriate. Keeping our constants and so  forth in
> > the appropriate python module would make things ever so much  simpler
> > here and there at the very least.
> > 
> > But we've never hacked on the backend, nor at the C python API level. 
> > But I see no reason why not to start now -- lurked here for many a 
> > year. For example, I see that plpython functions cannot be declared  to
> > return void. That can't be too tough to remedy. Implementing the  DBI
> > 2.0 API interface to SPI can wait another day.
> 
> Also have a look at: http://python.projects.postgresql.org/
> it needs some more love too but has high potential.

Yes, this one seems to be the pl/python done right :)

But it also suffers a little from trying to do too much at one time, and
so moves a little slow :(

> Maybe it can become next generation pl/pythonu? Would be nice.

I guess that it would need to be at least somewhat backwards compatible
to replace current pl/pythonu.

> And with even more love the restricted python from zope could
> be ported so there could be a pl/python again :-)

That would be nice, but actually not very high on my list of wishes, as
I mostly want to use plpythony as a replacement for writing C funtions,
and we probably will never have "restricted C"

--------------
Hannu