On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 6:23 AM, Pavel Stehule <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I can't to say so plpgpsm is an dialect of plpgsql. Minimally there
> are different parser. I am sure so supported functions can be shared,
> but it's mean really dramatic changes in plpgsql code. I belive so
> separate
On 31/03/2008, Stephen Frost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Pavel,
>
> Honestly, I havn't dug into the real patch all that deeply but I did
> notice a few minor issues which I've listed out below. The bigger
> question I have for this patch, however, is just how close is it to
> PL/pgSQL? I
Pavel,
Honestly, I havn't dug into the real patch all that deeply but I did
notice a few minor issues which I've listed out below. The bigger
question I have for this patch, however, is just how close is it to
PL/pgSQL? If the differences are minor and far between would it be
more reas
