Re: [HACKERS] plpgsql debugging

2003-09-08 Thread Richard Huxton
On Monday 08 September 2003 17:14, Andreas Pflug wrote: > Richard Huxton wrote: > >Actually, a simple trace ability would be a huge step forward. It'd save > > me dotting RAISE statements around my functions while I write them. > > Sounds bloody familiar... :-( > > > Even the ability to add DEBUG s

Re: [HACKERS] plpgsql debugging

2003-09-08 Thread Andreas Pflug
Richard Huxton wrote: Actually, a simple trace ability would be a huge step forward. It'd save me dotting RAISE statements around my functions while I write them. Sounds bloody familiar... :-( Even the ability to add DEBUG statements that checked some global flag before firing would be very us

Re: [HACKERS] plpgsql debugging

2003-09-08 Thread Richard Huxton
On Monday 08 September 2003 15:14, Andreas Pflug wrote: > > Looking at the code, I think that a validator could be added quite soon. > The PLpgSQL_execstate struct could be extended by a validation_active > bool flag, which changes the behaviour of all exec_stmt_XXX routines. > The validator primar

[HACKERS] plpgsql debugging

2003-09-08 Thread Andreas Pflug
The current implementation of plpgsql lacks some details that makes programming really hard: there's no language validator to check the code when creating the function, and there's support to debug the code. Before I start hacking on this, I'd like to share my thoughts. Looking at the code, I t