On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 8:44 AM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > Rather, I think the > point is that embedded Javascript is *extremely* popular, lots and > lots of people are supporting it, and we ought to seriously consider > doing the same. It's hard to think of another PL that we could add > that would give us anywhere near the bang for the buck that Javascript > would.
+1 to that. I'm not a huge fan of JS; wish that one of the Scheme variations had "made it" instead. But it's clear that a LOT of fairly successful work has gone into making JS implementations performant, and it's clearly heavily used. JS+hstore would probably draw in a bunch of users, and tempt them to the "SQL dark side" :-). Wanting a JSON processor isn't quite a good enough reason to add C++ support in order to draw in a JS interpreter. But I don't imagine things are restricted to just 1 JS implementation, and JSON isn't the only reason to do so. -- When confronted by a difficult problem, solve it by reducing it to the question, "How would the Lone Ranger handle this?" -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
