2016-11-06 2:12 GMT+01:00 Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us>: > Jim Nasby <jim.na...@bluetreble.com> writes: > > Attached is a patch that adds support for SRFs and returning composites > > from pl/tcl. This work was sponsored by Flight Aware. > > I spent a fair amount of time whacking this around, because I did not > like the fact that you were using the pltcl_proc_desc structs for > call-local data. That would fail nastily in a recursive function. > I ended up making a new struct to represent per-call data, which > allowed reducing the number of global pointers. > > I got the code to a state that I liked (attached), and started reviewing > the docs, and then it occurred to me to wonder why you'd chosen to use > Tcl lists to represent composite output values. The precedent established > by input argument handling is that composites are transformed to Tcl > arrays. So shouldn't we use an array to represent a composite result, > too? >
This can be similar to PLPythonu - one dimensional array is possible to transform to composite - when composite is expected. Regards Pavel > > I wouldn't necessarily object to allowing either representation, though > I'm not sure how we'd distinguish between them. > > 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 > >
