On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 9:31 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Let me explain the project standards in words of one syllable: user code > should not examine the contents of node trees. That's what pg_get_expr > is for. There is not, never has been, and never will be any guarantee > that we won't whack those structures around in completely arbitrary ways, > as long as we do a catversion bump along with it.
Many of those words have more than one syllable. Also, you're attacking a straw man. Accidentally storing a meaningless parse location in the catalog isn't a feature, and we shouldn't pretend otherwise. I agree that what Mark's doing is a bit unusual and doesn't necessarily need to work, and he seems to agree with that, too. That doesn't mean that the status quo is some brilliant piece of engineering. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
