On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 2:20 PM, Andrew Chernow <a...@esilo.com> wrote: > Jaime Casanova wrote: >> >> On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 1:34 PM, Andrew Chernow <a...@esilo.com> wrote: >>> >>> Jaime Casanova wrote: >>>> >>>> i extracted the functions to connect that Heikki put on psql in his >>>> patch for determining client_encoding from client locale and put it in >>>> libpq so i follow the PQconnectdbParams(* params[]) approach. >> >> [...] >>> >>> The below posts agreed on a two argument version of parallel arrays >>> (keywords, values): >>> >>> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-09/msg00533.php >>> http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-hackers/2009-09/msg00559.php >>> >> >> actually, Tom said: "it's hard to be sure which way is >> actually more convenient without having tried coding some likely >> calling scenarios both ways." >> > > Aahhh, correct you are Daniel son :) >
??? don't understand you ??? >> personally, i think it will cause more problems than solve because you >> have to be sure your arrays have relationship between them... >> > > A strict relationship exists either way. > [...] > > IMHO, the struct approach seems like a cleaner solution. > i agree > Any chance of using a term other than "params"? Maybe "options" or "props"? > i don't have any problems with "options" -- Atentamente, Jaime Casanova Soporte y capacitación de PostgreSQL Asesoría y desarrollo de sistemas Guayaquil - Ecuador Cel. +59387171157 -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
