> I lean with you and Tom. While running it over the same libpq protocol > would be helpful in some ways, it would have a lot of drawbacks and > would really change the function of libpq. I think a separate debugging > protocol is in order. > One message? I can't belive :).
> work on it (ANTLR currently generates Python, Java, or C++). I don't > suggest we really reuse one of the current VMs as it would require a lot > more support and coordination. Let's take the bytecode discussion off > this thread and move it to another. There is certainly a good and bad > side to using bytecode and I would be glad to discuss it in another thread. > I see only one advantage of WM - sharing between languages. But SQL/PSM or PL/pgSQL are not clasic languages. Big advantage is big disadvantage too -> relation on SQL engine. I can use all SQL types, but I can't to do efective concation of strings. Sorry, I don't see any benefit of bytecode for these languages. PL/pgSQL works fine (for specific task). What can be better? o evaluation of expressions. -- needs integration with sql parser o debugging o persistent compiled code o syntax Please, write me, private, your opinions. And don't scowl at me, so I am in oportunity :). Regards Pavek ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend
