On tor, 2012-03-08 at 23:15 +0100, Pavel Stehule wrote: > But you propose some little bit different than is current plpgsql > checker and current design.
Is it? Why? It looks like exactly the same thing, except that the interfaces you propose are tightly geared toward checking SQL-like languages, which looks like a mistake to me. > It's not bad, but it is some different and it is not useful for > plpgsql - external stored procedures are different, than SQL > procedures and probably you will check different issues. > > I don't think so multiple checkers and external checkers are necessary > - if some can living outside, then it should to live outside. Internal > checker can be one for PL language. It is parametrized - so you can > control goals of checking. What would be the qualifications for being an internal or an external checker? Why couldn't your plpgsql checker be an external checker? -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
