Greg,
Well the goal is to make them simpler. I don't know any language that
has implemented what you describe. Either you have access to the
internal methods of a class or you don't and you only have access to
the public api. That seems to work for much more sophisticated
languages than ours
Josh Berkus wrote:
Well I don't mind push but I still think pop is an error. What you
really want to do is restore it to the value you started with. You
don't want to remove the last element since that may not be the
element you added. Some function you called may have added an extra
element
On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 7:57 PM, Alvaro Herrera
alvhe...@commandprompt.com wrote:
Josh Berkus wrote:
Well I don't mind push but I still think pop is an error. What you
really want to do is restore it to the value you started with. You
don't want to remove the last element since that may not be
On Mon, Jun 01, 2009 at 08:05:33PM +0100, Greg Stark wrote:
As I said earlier I doubt pop or delete is ever going to actually
be what you want. I suspect you're far more likely to want to restore
it to what it was before you started altering it.
As support I'll point out this is what our C
On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 3:27 PM, Sam Mason s...@samason.me.uk wrote:
On Mon, Jun 01, 2009 at 08:05:33PM +0100, Greg Stark wrote:
As I said earlier I doubt pop or delete is ever going to actually
be what you want. I suspect you're far more likely to want to restore
it to what it was before you
Greg,
What's the point of namespaces if not to implement visibility? The
interesting thing to do would be to hide all the internal foo
functions in a foo.* schema and only put the external api in public.
That is an interesting idea. However, what our real users are really
doing in the field
On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 9:12 PM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
This assumes that all users should have access to the same public APIs as
all other users. Real applications are more complex.
Well the goal is to make them simpler. I don't know any language that
has implemented what you
On May 31, 2009, at 3:47 PM, Greg Stark wrote:
On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 9:12 PM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com
wrote:
This assumes that all users should have access to the same public
APIs as
all other users. Real applications are more complex.
Well the goal is to make them simpler. I
On May 29, 2009, at 5:16 PM, Greg Stark wrote:
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 11:03 PM, David E. Wheeler da...@kineticode.com
wrote:
On May 29, 2009, at 2:52 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
a) the ability to push a schema onto the current search path
b) the ability to pull a schema off the current search
Greg,
Do we really? The only reason people are having trouble managing their
search_path is because they're not using it as intended and putting
things in lots of different schemas that they intend to all be
visible.
Apparently you've never adminned a database with hundreds (or thousands)
of
On May 29, 2009, at 2:52 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
a) the ability to push a schema onto the current search path
b) the ability to pull a schema off the current search path
push, pop, shift, unshift. :-)
Come to think of it, I want these for arrays, too. ;-)
Best,
David
--
Sent via
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 11:03 PM, David E. Wheeler da...@kineticode.com wrote:
On May 29, 2009, at 2:52 PM, Josh Berkus wrote:
a) the ability to push a schema onto the current search path
b) the ability to pull a schema off the current search path
push, pop, shift, unshift. :-)
Come to
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 10:52 PM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
Sometimes one needs to use schemas just for namespacing (they are called
namespaces after all), and not for security or visibility.
What's the point of namespaces if not to implement visibility? The
interesting thing to do
13 matches
Mail list logo
