Re: [HACKERS] Last minute mini-proposal (I know, I know)forPQexecf()

2007-04-02 Thread Magnus Hagander
On Sat, Mar 31, 2007 at 07:16:19PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: Andrew Dunstan wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's important to get the *right* interface into the first release that has it. Agreed, that's why I proposed the right interface to begin with :-) Maybe

Re: [HACKERS] Last minute mini-proposal (I know, I know) forPQexecf()

2007-03-31 Thread korryd
Way too late for 8.3 --- if we were going to do something like this, we should think first and program later. In particular, blindly adopting the sprintf format string definition doesn't seem very helpful. The sorts of escapes I'd want to have are properly quoted SQL identifier, properly

Re: [HACKERS] Last minute mini-proposal (I know, I know) forPQexecf()

2007-03-31 Thread Tom Lane
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 2) It's important to get the interface into a near-future release so that client applications can start using it soon. It's important to get the *right* interface into the first release that has it. The day before feature freeze is way too late for blue-sky design

Re: [HACKERS] Last minute mini-proposal (I know, I know)forPQexecf()

2007-03-31 Thread korryd
It's important to get the *right* interface into the first release that has it. Agreed, that's why I proposed the right interface to begin with :-) The day before feature freeze is way too late for blue-sky design IMHO. Ok, I can certainly bring this up again in the next release cycle.

Re: [HACKERS] Last minute mini-proposal (I know, I know)forPQexecf()

2007-03-31 Thread Bruce Momjian
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I note that the nominal schedule http://www.postgresql.org/developer/roadmap says that all major proposals should have been made and reviewed at least a month ago. Consider me spanked... (and quit giggling Bruce). Awe, you got me. :-) FYI, I sung Dream On

Re: [HACKERS] Last minute mini-proposal (I know, I know)forPQexecf()

2007-03-31 Thread Andrew Dunstan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's important to get the *right* interface into the first release that has it. Agreed, that's why I proposed the right interface to begin with :-) Maybe the first thing we might usefully do would be to document PQExpBuffer. And you can send in a patch for

Re: [HACKERS] Last minute mini-proposal (I know, I know)forPQexecf()

2007-03-31 Thread Bruce Momjian
Andrew Dunstan wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's important to get the *right* interface into the first release that has it. Agreed, that's why I proposed the right interface to begin with :-) Maybe the first thing we might usefully do would be to document PQExpBuffer.

Re: [HACKERS] Last minute mini-proposal (I know, I know)forPQexecf()

2007-03-31 Thread Tom Lane
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It's important to get the *right* interface into the first release that has it. Agreed, that's why I proposed the right interface to begin with :-) I don't necessarily object to PQexecf() as a shortcut for some multi-step operation, but I don't think you've got the