James Pye writes: > Type conversion > > plpython's current type conversion implementation appears to be dependent > on strings as the common format. This is fine, but not very extensible as > is, unless you don't mind explicitly parsing strings inside each function > that takes an unsupported data type. I was thinking that a better solution > would be creating a python object type inside the database. Thus allowing > users to write casts to and from non-standard or unimplemented data types > with little difficulty(well, maybe some :). This would allow conversion in > an extensible way, which doesn't require modification to plpython. Storage > could be easily achieved by pickling the object. Another thought would be > to just pass valid PyObject pointers in and out of conversion procedures, > effectively disallowing storage(outside the process in which the object was > created in), unless it is possible to have a persistent storage mechanism > that makes it possible to go through pickle?.?..(yeah, I'm new to pgsql > dev).
As a first step I would be already be happy, if plpython would use more Python datatypes, for example: - currently, a Point (or a box, polygon, etc.) is returned as a string "(0, 1)" instead of a Python tuple (or list) (0, 1) - the same holds for arrays: instead of getting an array as string (which I have to parse into a python list), I would like to get a python list in the first place. Regards, Tilo ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])