Patch applied. Thanks.
---
Marko Kreen wrote:
> On 4/3/07, Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Great, patch applied and TODO item removed.
>
> If you are already patching, please apply the following patch also.
>
On 4/3/07, Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Great, patch applied and TODO item removed.
If you are already patching, please apply the following patch also.
It removes last remaining casts inside struct definitions.
Such usage is bad practice, as it hides problems from compiler.
Reason
Great, patch applied and TODO item removed.
---
Marko Kreen wrote:
> On 4/3/07, Marko Kreen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 4/3/07, Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Great. Care to take on the Python boolean
On 4/3/07, Marko Kreen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 4/3/07, Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Great. Care to take on the Python boolean patch?
>
> o Allow PL/PythonU to return boolean rather than 1/0
I think this should be also solved with backwards-compat ifdef.
Tested with p
On 4/3/07, Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Great. Care to take on the Python boolean patch?
o Allow PL/PythonU to return boolean rather than 1/0
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2007-01/msg00596.php
It requires only a few lines of code, but some testing, wh
Patch applied. Thanks.
---
Marko Kreen wrote:
> On 4/3/07, Marko Kreen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 4/3/07, Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Where are we on Python 2.5?
> >
> > I'll look into it.
>
> Fo
Great. Care to take on the Python boolean patch?
o Allow PL/PythonU to return boolean rather than 1/0
http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-patches/2007-01/msg00596.php
It requires only a few lines of code, but some testing, which you seem
to have available.
-
Marko Kreen escribió:
> On 4/3/07, Marko Kreen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >On 4/3/07, Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Where are we on Python 2.5?
> >
> >I'll look into it.
>
> Following patch converts plpython.c to use Python 2.5 types,
> with compat ifdef for older version. This
On 4/3/07, Marko Kreen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 4/3/07, Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Where are we on Python 2.5?
I'll look into it.
Following patch converts plpython.c to use Python 2.5 types,
with compat ifdef for older version. This is recommended
method by PEP 353 to fix
On 4/3/07, Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Where are we on Python 2.5?
I'll look into it.
--
marko
---(end of broadcast)---
TIP 1: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PR
Where are we on Python 2.5?
---
Tom Lane wrote:
> Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> No, it just looks like a Python API 2.5 change to me
>
> > Attached is a patch that fixes the warnings. Unfortunately, it seems
On 3/6/07, Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tue, 2007-03-06 at 00:18 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Perhaps they provide a compatibility hack that you didn't spot?
Quite possibly. Anyone have any suggestions?
Python guys discuss the situation here:
http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0353/
On Tue, 2007-03-06 at 00:18 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Sounds like #ifdef time to me --- but it seems a bit strange; wouldn't
> the Python guys have taken a bit more care for compatibility of
> user-supplied code?
Yeah, I was a bit surprised as well. I won't claim to have any
familiarity with the Py
Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> No, it just looks like a Python API 2.5 change to me
> Attached is a patch that fixes the warnings. Unfortunately, it seems
> this patch won't compile against Python 2.4: the 2.5 API requires the
> use of some typedef's that AFAICS were only introduced in
On Sat, 2007-03-03 at 14:29 -0500, Neil Conway wrote:
> No, it just looks like a Python API 2.5 change to me
Attached is a patch that fixes the warnings. Unfortunately, it seems
this patch won't compile against Python 2.4: the 2.5 API requires the
use of some typedef's that AFAICS were only introd
On Sat, 2007-03-03 at 11:21 -0800, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> There is no Ubuntu Fiesty... yet ;) you are compile -head with -head...
> sounds like a snafu to begin with
No, it just looks like a Python API 2.5 change to me. I'd look into it
myself, but I don't have the free cycles at the moment.
>
>> src/pl/plpython/plpython.c:2010: warning: 'intintargfunc' is deprecated
>> src/pl/plpython/plpython.c:2010: warning: initialization from
>> incompatible pointer type
>> src/pl/plpython/plpython.c:2011: warning: initialization from
>> incompatible pointer type
>> src/pl/plpython/plpython.c:2012:
Neil Conway wrote:
> FYI, I see the following warnings compiling CVS HEAD:
>
> src/pl/plpython/plpython.c:2006: warning: initialization from
> incompatible pointer type
> src/pl/plpython/plpython.c:2008: warning: 'intargfunc' is deprecated
> src/pl/plpython/plpython.c:2008: warning: initialization
FYI, I see the following warnings compiling CVS HEAD:
src/pl/plpython/plpython.c:2006: warning: initialization from
incompatible pointer type
src/pl/plpython/plpython.c:2008: warning: 'intargfunc' is deprecated
src/pl/plpython/plpython.c:2008: warning: initialization from
incompatible pointer type
19 matches
Mail list logo
