On 8/16/16 12:53 PM, Joy Arulraj wrote:
    > The whole thing would make a lot more sense given a credible design
    > for error handling that keeps both languages happy.

    Well, getting so that we can at least compile in both systems would
    certainly increase the chances of somebody being willing to work on
    such a design.  And if nobody ever does, then at least people who want
    to fork and do research projects based on PostgreSQL will have
    slightly less work to do when they want to hack it up.  PostgreSQL
    seems to be a very popular starting point for research work, but a
    paper I read recently complained about the antiquity of our code base.
    I prefer to call that backward-compatibility, but at some point people
    stop thinking of you as backward-compatible and instead think of you
    as simply backward.

I agree, this was the main reason why we wanted to add support for C++.

Joy, do you have an idea what a *minimally invasive* patch for C++ support would look like? That's certainly the first step here.
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX
Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com
855-TREBLE2 (855-873-2532)   mobile: 512-569-9461

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to