Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm not objecting to your doing it, exactly, just suggesting that
> there are better things to spend your time on.

Heh, probably true :-)

I'll put this on the back-burner for now, and repost a complete patch
later if I get around to it.

> This I would object to, since it creates a risk of failure if anyone
> is incautious enough to write a non-constant argument to
> appendStringInfoString.


(Semi-OT note: allowing the user to extend the compiler to enforce
rules like this is a cool idea:


---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
      subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
      message can get through to the mailing list cleanly

Reply via email to