On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 3:15 PM, Peter Eisentraut <pete...@gmx.net> wrote: > On tor, 2012-03-08 at 19:19 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: >> On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 4:54 PM, Peter Eisentraut <pete...@gmx.net> wrote: >> > * It's not terribly important to me to be able to run checkers >> > separately. If I wanted to do that, I would just disable or >> > remove the checker. >> >> Does this requirement mean that you want to essentially associate a >> set of checkers with each language and then, when asked to check a >> function, run all of them serially in an undefined order? > > Well, the more I think about it and look at this patch, the more I think > that this would be complete overkill and possibly quite useless for my > purposes. I can implement the entire essence of this framework (except > the plpgsql_checker itself, which is clearly useful) in 10 lines, > namely: > > CREATE OR REPLACE FUNCTION pep8(src text) RETURNS text > IMMUTABLE > LANGUAGE plsh > AS $$ > #!/bin/bash > > pep8 --ignore=W391 <(echo "$1") 2>&1 | sed -r 's/^[^:]*://' > $$; > > SELECT proname, pep8(prosrc) FROM pg_proc WHERE prolang = ANY (SELECT oid > FROM pg_language WHERE lanname LIKE '%python%') ORDER BY 1; > > I don't know what more one would need.
Well, I agree with you, but Tom disagrees, so that's why we're talking about it... -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
