On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 08:12:49AM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Which direction are you hoping to go --- remove Iconst/Sconst, or use > them everywhere?
For ecpg I don't care, I have to make some changes during translation anyway. Right now my script just sets both to ecpg_iconst. There is a small advantage in keeping Iconst/Sconst as it might save me a line or two in the script. As for the backend I would say that removing Iconst/Sconst make sense. These rules just add an overhead, albeit a very small one. But still this advantage outweighs the very small scripting advantage. So yes, I'd remove Iconst/Sconst. Michael -- Michael Meskes Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org) Michael at BorussiaFan dot De, Meskes at (Debian|Postgresql) dot Org ICQ: 179140304, AIM/Yahoo: michaelmeskes, Jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Go VfL Borussia! Go SF 49ers! Use Debian GNU/Linux! Use PostgreSQL! -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
