"Neil Conway" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> Attached is a patch that implements <> for the tid type. This is based
> on a patch submitted by Mark Kirkwood in October of 2005. I added some
> regression tests, avoided unnecessarily renumbering a few OIDs in the
> system catalogs, and bumped the catver
Tom Lane wrote:
This sort of thing normally requires more thought than just removing
the safety check. What happens when the python code does/doesn't return
a value, in both cases (declared return type void or not)?
Attached is a more complete patch:
- if the function is declared to return vo
On Sat, 2006-02-25 at 22:00 -0500, Neil Conway wrote:
> Attached is a patch that implements <> for the tid type. This is based
> on a patch submitted by Mark Kirkwood in October of 2005. I added some
> regression tests, avoided unnecessarily renumbering a few OIDs in the
> system catalogs, and bump
