Brendan Jurd <dire...@gmail.com> writes:
> 2009/8/11 Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us>:
>> If we expose it at fmgr level it should definitely not return cstring.
>> However, I wasn't foreseeing doing that --- does the submitted patch
>> expose it?
> Sorry, I'm a little hazy on the terminology here. If by "expose it at
> fmgr level" you mean did I add it to pg_proc, then no, I didn't.
OK.
> The function is declared in builtins.h as "extern Datum
> numeric_out_sci(PG_FUNCTION_ARGS);", and called from formatting.c
> using the DirectFunctionCall arrangement.
If it's not meant to be in pg_proc, I wouldn't bother with using the V1
call protocol for it. "extern char *numeric_out_sci(Numeric x)" would
be sufficient, and less notation on both caller and callee sides.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
